The Wyatt Benevolent Institution Incorporated (Objects) Amendment Bill

Second Reading

Adjourned debate on second reading.

(Continued from 20 February 2020.)

Mr TEAGUE (Heysen) (16:47): It is my pleasure to rise and support the speedy passage through the house of The Wyatt Benevolent Institution Incorporated (Objects) Amendment Bill 2020. This bill would amend and update a 1935 private act of the same name. That, in turn, makes subject to legislation the institution tasked with implementing the objects of trusts established under the will of Dr William Wyatt.

The story of the philanthropic generosity of Dr Wyatt really is extraordinary. Before I address in a moment the principles that will be applied in the amending of the objects of those trusts that are the subject of this amending legislation, it is an occasion to reflect upon the extraordinary gift of Dr Wyatt and his wife, Julia, in circumstances of considerable personal tragedy on both their parts during the course of their lifetime, coupled with a lifetime of service in the early decades of the colony of South Australia.

Dr Wyatt and his wife, Julia, arrived at Holdfast Bay in February 1837, early on in the establishment of the colony. As soon as March 1837, Dr Wyatt commenced acquiring property, including property within the square mile of the City of Adelaide, which is the primary cause for the acquisition of the considerable wealth that he attained in the course of his life. At the same time, through his life, Dr Wyatt was a considerable contributor to the medical profession and to medical administration. In the period he was living and practising in South Australia, up until his death in 1886, he made extraordinary contributions to the medical profession and its administration, but his wealth was acquired by real estate investment in the very early days of the colony.

I adverted to the considerable tragedy that he and his wife experienced: of their five children, only one survived childhood and that child died at the age of 34. So when Dr Wyatt died, there were no children to pass his estate on to. That may have played a significant role in his determining to give generously, as he has by the establishment of the institution. I also note that, apart from making a significant contribution to the medical profession, Dr Wyatt was a founder of St Peter's College and Pulteney Grammar School, among others. He is a celebrated foundation contributor to St Peter's College and I recognise that.

At the date of his death, his estate was valued in the order of £50,000. Subject to certain specific bequests that were made and that had certain annuities that were the subject of his will, he dedicated the vast bulk of his estate to the trusts that are the subject of the act for the benefit of those in need, particularly South Australians in need. I will come in a moment to the particular words that were used to describe it—those that we are updating by this amending bill—but it was an extraordinary gift in those terms and for those purposes at that time.

Perhaps the best way to illustrate that is that as of recently the value of the assets that are subject to the institution's control is in the order of $90 million. The Premier was only just recently the guest of honour at an occasion to recognise the amount of $50 million having been provided pursuant to the trusts in the course of the lifetime of the institution. Clearly, it is a gift that has kept giving over the course of the decades and the generations and one that is no less relevant, needed or applied in today's modern circumstances.

While recognising the achievements of the trust up to the present day, I note that in 2005, as I understand it, the sculptor Jeremy Herbert was commissioned to produce a sculpture of the leaf that represents the Wyatt institution. The leaf recognises that philanthropy inspires people to grow, so that important symbol of the Wyatt institution was prepared at that time. In 2018, the Wyatt leaf was, appropriately in my view, transferred to have a place of honour at the entrance of the new Royal Adelaide Hospital.

That connection to Dr Wyatt's life and contribution to medicine, as well as his very generous philanthropic gift, has been recognised in recent times in those two very significant ways, as well as in the ongoing legacy of his gift. In the language of the day, Dr Wyatt's will expressed the objects of the trusts in somewhat antiquated ways. It might bear repeating that the objects, as described in the will, were expressly:

…to benefit persons above the laboring class who may be in poor or reduced circumstances by supplying them with dwelling houses at a moderate or nominal rental or without payment of any rent or to benefit such persons by any other means and in any other way that my Trustee shall deem expedient and the qualifications for participation in the benefits of the said trusts shall be that the recipient of such benefits shall belong to a class above that of laborer and that he or she shall be in poor or reduced circumstances and of good moral character and conduct and preference shall be given to persons who shall have been resident in the said Province—

that is, South Australia—

for a period of five years and upwards.

As is readily apparent on the face of those words, such a stipulation is barely recognisable let alone applicable in the modern day, so it is desirable for there to be clearer, plainer and more modern language with respect to the objects of the trusts. Indeed, as clause 3 of the bill describes, in substituting those modern provisions for what had found voice to those old objects in section 5 of the act as it presently stands, this bill would amend the objects of the institution so as to be for the provision of assistance to persons in poor and needy circumstances, so considerably simplifying that test.

Secondly, it is noted that the amendment does away with references to the good moral character and conduct test. I would suggest, for wont of certainty apart from anything else, that the simpler substitution of objects, as is described in clause 3 of the bill, makes the task of the trustees both certain and practical. The preference in the private act, which is carried on in the words of the bill, that is to be given to people who have resided in South Australia over recent years is retained. The objects of the institution as amended, the subject of the 2020 amending bill, will be both modernised and considerably simpler, and they will retain that special connection to assist South Australians.

I might pause there to note the somewhat unusual circumstances of the amendment of an act in order to deal with an amendment to the objects of a trust. Were it not for the legislation, there would be possibly two routes available to the trustees. One would be pursuant to the cy pres doctrine at general law, the doctrine that provides for a trust, where its express objects no longer effectively make any sense or cannot be applied directly, to be amended so that they can be so as to avoid the possibility otherwise that the trust might fail and be rendered incapable of administration. The cy pres doctrine would be an alternative open in the ordinary course.

Secondly, if the trustees were requiring to make amendment absent this legislation, there may be a procedure available under the Trustee Act for the trustees to apply to the Supreme Court pursuant to that act. While it is these days and in any event a particularly unusual situation that a private trust of this kind has found expression in legislation, it provides another means by which the objects can be amended and updated so that they can be applied in modern circumstances.

Having adverted to the doctrine of cy pres, I think it is also important to note that the legislature, in taking these steps to move these amendments, the subject of the bill, will do so with a clear eye to the objects that are expressed in the will. I think the people of South Australia would do well to look carefully at what we do in this place in making these amendments.

While there may be power, in theory, to go ahead and amend the objects of the institution considerably to depart from what is expressed in the will, in my view this is a very good example of circumstances in which the modern world has moved on considerably from the world of the 1880s when Dr Wyatt's will was drawn and the late 1880s when the trustees first met and commenced to apply those objects as Dr Wyatt had expressed them. I do not think for a moment, and I do not think there is any suggestion in this amendment process, that anything of this kind is expressed by the parliament.

I do not think for a moment that there is any reflection on Dr Wyatt's intent. I think my remarks at the outset I hope amply illustrate both the practical effect that the institution has had over many decades—indeed, over what is well in excess of a hundred years—and the fact that the institution is still responsible for funds approaching $100 million speaks both to its good management and to the considerable success that the institution has had in helping South Australians. Some practical illustrations of that also bear perhaps putting on the public record together with these remarks. Those works are well documented, and I certainly encourage people to look closely at the work of the institution. It is remarkable.

I would simply note briefly that the institution has as its priority four key areas—those of employment, education, financial wellbeing and housing—as the objects suggest. In the 2018 financial year alone, the institution made grants of $3.4 million and, perhaps as importantly, the institution partnered with more than 80 partner groups and delivered support and assistance to more than 5,000 individuals. If the 2018 experience serves as a guide of the work of Dr Wyatt so many decades after his death, it might also serve to endorse the sentiments he expressed at the time in articulating what he was endeavouring to do by his extraordinary gift.

The amendments that are the subject of the bill are made with the express consideration of the governors of the institution. It is a work in which the government takes this relatively rare step of assisting a private organisation to regularise its affairs in that way, and so I endorse the amendments, I commend the work of the institution and I wish that it will continue for many more decades ahead.

Ms STINSON (Badcoe) (17:08): I rise as the lead speaker for the opposition on The Wyatt Benevolent Institution Incorporated (Objects) Amendment Bill of this year, and it pleases me greatly to be able to indicate that the opposition intends to support this bill.

As members may be aware, this is a hybrid bill, or at the time it was called a private bill, as it delivers a benefit to a discrete group of people, being the recipients of the grants from the trust, as well as providing a broader public benefit. Owing to that, the bill must be considered by a select committee of the House of Assembly, and I look forward to putting my nomination forward to be included on that committee later today, which will in fact be my first select committee in this place.

This amendment bill seeks to amend and remove archaic and restrictive definitions and language from the act to enable The Wyatt Trust to grant funds to more people in need and, in particular, people with difficult or even criminal histories. The Wyatt Benevolent Institution, which is better known more colloquially as The Wyatt Trust, I understand was created in 1886 upon the death of Dr William Wyatt, which I think was in 1883.

The trust's operation was formalised in 1935 with the passage of The Wyatt Benevolent Institution Incorporated (Private) Bill. That act governs the objects and operation of the trust. I had some fun in recent weeks in the parliamentary library looking up the records of the original debates. I will read a passage from the Hansard of one of those original debates because it sheds a bit of light on why legislation was even needed in 1935, even though the trust had been in operation for several decades before that.

The Hon. H.D. Young, who was the member for Southern at the time, told the house that Dr Wyatt's whole estate was really intended as a benefit to schoolteachers. He said:

His will stated that the estate should be formed into a trust for the benefit of clerical workers, school teachers, [and so forth], and the trust has been carried on ever since for that purpose. The amending Bill—

this is the bill in 1935—

is to provide, firstly, that the trustees can invest money by building. The Trust has made a considerable sum by building properties, as that has proved to be the most profitable investment. I think most of the Wyatt Street properties—

which I was privileged to be in the other day; Wyatt Street is across the road from where The Wyatt Trust now has its offices—

belong to the Trust, and those properties are let, and the proceeds paid out in cash to enable the beneficiaries to exercise their own choice in spending the money. Until now—

that is 1935—

the trustees have had to appeal to the court for power to do various things.

It was really interesting to read through those old debates. It was also encouraging to be able to see that, even back in 1935, support for The Wyatt Trust was bipartisan. Of course, that is maintained to this day.

The act currently stipulates that the trust may only allocate funding for people in 'poor or reduced circumstances' and to people of 'good moral character'. That has caused some difficulty for the trust in more recent times in providing programs to people who, for example, may have criminal convictions, as that definition would tend to exclude the trust from assisting people who found themselves serving custodial sentences in the past or who may have had other things happen in their life that may see them fall foul of that rather archaic definition and stipulation in the act.

The amendment bill varies and removes that language to enable a greater range of people to benefit from the grant programs, and that is a great thing. In my view, there is not enough done to support people who have served their time or, indeed, are midway through serving their time. In my experience of working with victims of crime, victims are too acutely aware that almost always one day the person that offended against them will be released.

Victims have frequently said to me in the past that they want to be as sure as they possibly can that people who have offended against them, who have served gaol time and come out the other side, have learned something from it and are in a better position to contribute positively to the community and, of course, will not be a risk to anyone in our community. That does not happen in isolation. That can only be achieved when we support people both while they are within the justice system and, very importantly, as they are preparing to leave and then leave the justice system.

An organisation like The Wyatt Trust has some serious runs on the board when it comes to assisting disadvantaged people in our community. It is exceptionally well placed to continue and expand its work to assist people either in custody or leaving custody, as well as their families, to be able to build a better life for themselves and be able to contribute more fully to our community.

The Wyatt Trust was established from the will of Dr William Wyatt. Dr William Wyatt and Mrs Julia Wyatt travelled from Plymouth in the UK, arriving in Holdfast Bay in South Australia in February 1837. In fact, when they arrived the colony was only a month old, so they were certainly pioneers in every sense. Dr Wyatt was the first—

The Hon. V.A. Chapman: A month or seven months?

Ms STINSON: I am told it was a month according to the book that they gave me. I will check that before we get to our third reading speeches, thank you, Attorney. Dr Wyatt was also the first colonial surgeon. That is recorded in the Hansard from 1935. During his life in Adelaide, Dr Wyatt held a number of significant official positions.

He was a visionary who was committed to public life and was amongst the founding leaders in this state. He certainly saw a value in establishing institutions that would contribute to the public good. He was a founder of many institutions, including the Royal Adelaide Hospital, St Peter's College, Pulteney Grammar School, Holy Trinity Church, the gardens, the public library and even the Adelaide Club. He was also the inspector-general of schools and clearly was very passionate about education and the work of teachers, considering what he decided to do with his will.

He set up his first home in Grenfell Street and later at his home named Kurralta, which is in Burnside. His son William was the only one of his five children to survive childhood. As we heard from the member for Heysen earlier, William passed away at the age of 35, which of course left Dr Wyatt with no heirs to his extensive property portfolio and wealth, most of which was derived from his purchase of land in those early days of our colony, both in the city and in metropolitan areas.

Dr Wyatt wrote his will in 1881, naming the first governors of his institution. Having witnessed some of the early South Australian settlers struggle through adversity and poverty, he decided to leave his estate for the benefit of South Australians in poor or reduced circumstances. Dr Wyatt died in June 1886, according to these notes. The first meeting of the governors of The Wyatt Trust was held soon after, commencing a practice of making regular grants to assist individuals in need. That practice certainly continues to this day.

The bequest of Dr Wyatt was valued at approximately £50,000 on his death. Last year, the trust distributed $3.4 million in grants. It recently celebrated the milestone of contributing a total of $50 million in grants to South Australians, which is a truly wonderful achievement and something that really should be celebrated. Currently, the trust is worth a whopping $100 million because of that original money but also because of the very wise investment decisions of the board and others connected with the trust since it was established so long ago.

The Wyatt Trust and the James and Diana Ramsay Foundation are two of the most notable public benefit trusts in this state. I think it is really important that we in this place acknowledge the work of The Wyatt Trust and other organisations and the huge difference that they make in the lives of South Australians. The general public are largely unaware of the work and the huge sums of money that are contributed through philanthropy in this state.

I think those of us here have a duty to draw attention to that and to celebrate it when the opportunity arises. Often, the people who are behind these trusts do not want any great attention on their work. Modesty is certainly a rare attribute in this day and age, but the donors themselves, as well as their families, the boards and the staff who carry out this important philanthropic work, should be thanked and recognised for what are truly life-changing contributions that they are making.

Today, The Wyatt Trust focuses on improving opportunity and the quality of life for South Australians experiencing hardship. They do that across four priority areas: increasing employment opportunities, improving the retention of young people in education, promoting financial wellbeing and providing appropriate and sustainable housing options. I am sure everyone here would agree that, much like in 1935 when this was written, those are still key concerns in our community and areas of some focus for all governments. To achieve those objectives, the trust administers three major grants programs.

Its small grants program is probably the best known and that program assists individuals directly with items to assist them in a time of crisis or to help them deal with and hopefully overcome poverty. That can include grants for things like white goods, removalist costs and skip bins. There are a few examples of all too common circumstances in which those goods are needed. For example, this fund also funds computers and other technology equipment for children who need that assistance in order to get a good education. That is a great use of these funds.

We know that there is increasing pressure on children and on families to have technology in our schools and higher institutions, and that is incredibly expensive. I did not have a computer in my home when I was a kid. There are still many families these days who simply do not have the funds to be able to afford even what might be considered quite basic technological education aids. This fund goes a long way to making sure that those children are included and have everything they need to get a good education.

Another example is, families fleeing domestic violence. Sometimes you do need help in a hurry and it is comforting to know that The Wyatt Trust is there and can disburse funds quite quickly in situations of emergency and great need. The second grant program is the partnership grants, which are run in association with 90 not-for-profit organisations in South Australia—90 organisations is quite a lot. Basically, that money is provided to reputable non-government organisations and then they are able to disburse those funds to people. Lastly, the major grants run both not-for-profit programs and government department programs. For example, there is the Yunga Nungas program with Department of Human Services, which I might discuss in a bit more detail in a minute.

Some of those NGOs that work in partnership with The Wyatt Trust operate in the area of child protection and address the wider contributing factors to family breakdown, child neglect and abuse. Certainly through my work as the shadow minister, I have come across the incredible contribution of The Wyatt Trust more than a few times. They are working on issues such as drug and alcohol abuse, domestic violence, poverty, homelessness, unemployment and access to education. Not-for-profit organisations such as Lutheran Community Care, Anglicare, Centacare, Wesley Mission, Time for Kids and one of my favourites, Grandparents for Grandchildren, are also beneficiaries and work closely with The Wyatt Trust.

With key assets, The Wyatt Trust helps to provide funds for the camps it runs for children and assists with taxi vouchers for the Family by Family program. They are all great beneficiaries of The Wyatt Trust and really are empowered to do more of what they do so well in our community with the support of The Wyatt Trust and those wise investments that have been made over a long period of time and the generosity of the trust. Another great program it is involved in is Bolta Wiltja, which is an Aboriginal program in which schools can use money provided to them by The Wyatt Trust as they see fit to assist Aboriginal students to engage fully with education and to provide the best possible employment opportunities for them in future.

As I mentioned, Yunga Nungas is a program that is run through the Department of Human Services and has been for some time now. That program is targeted at young Aboriginal men who have been in and out of the justice system. It offers 24/7 support to the people who are involved with that program. There is a five-year funding commitment there and it is based at Regency Park.

The trust has also done some work with SAHMRI, including diabetes research, and in the past they have also invested in funding research around resilience, which is a topic that I am quite interested in. Some people can go through quite difficult circumstances and experiences in their lives, particularly in their young lives, and for some it makes them stronger and it makes them achieve great things in their life, but for others it leads to quite the reverse. I find the work that is being done in that area of resilience particularly interesting and particularly pertinent to the work of child protection as well. They also support our Operation Flinders and Youth Opportunities.

I would like to conclude by thanking the Chief Executive of The Wyatt Trust, Stacey Thomas, who has been kind enough to give me her time and knowledge as I have assessed this amendment bill and sought to learn more about the work of the trust. Stacey has been fantastic in answering all my questions to really just satisfy myself and those on this side that the amendments that are being sought to be made to this bill will actually help them achieve the objectives they need and that we will not have to come back here and further amend it anytime in the near future, and that what this parliament seeks to do will ultimately benefit them in their work so that they can continue to contribute in such a significant way, as they already do.

Again, my sincere thanks goes to Stacey Thomas. She has also been kind enough to give me this fantastic book, which is rather thick. I cannot claim to have finished it yet. It is by Carol Fort and it is called Keeping a Trust. It is all about Dr William Wyatt and The Wyatt Trust. If anyone wants to read through it, there is a really fascinating passage on pages 44 and 45 about Dr Wyatt's time as the Protector of Aborigines.

It is fascinating because essentially it recounts a horrible incident in which an Aboriginal man was accused of murdering one of the British settlers and how Wyatt advocated for Aboriginal witnesses to have their views considered in the subsequent pseudo-legal process that happened. Obviously, that would have been a very difficult thing to do at the time. I think that really marks him out as someone of great standing and impressive moral fortitude in our community. I look forward to finishing reading that and I thank Stacey for that.

I would also like to thank The Wyatt Trust board and all the staff for their work; they have a very big job. I think the philanthropy that they are administering and continuing so long after Dr Wyatt first had the idea of supporting people who are less advantaged than himself really pays off for our state every day, and they should be commended for that. I look forward to hopefully joining the committee to examine this bill and to returning to the house at a later stage. I indicate again that the opposition certainly, at this stage at least, supports both this bill and, of course, the work of The Wyatt Trust.

Ms COOK (Hurtle Vale) (17:27): I would like to make a brief contribution on this really important bill. First of all, I would like to declare an interest in The Wyatt Trust in relation to the Sammy D Foundation, which is the organisation that I established with my husband. I am no longer affiliated at all with the Sammy D Foundation, but my husband is a director and an employee, so he does indirectly receive some funds from The Wyatt Trust, so it should be declared that that actually happens.

However, I do not believe that my supporting the work of a non-government organisation in the very broad space should be prevented in terms of being able to contribute towards the amazing ongoing work of Dr William Wyatt, which today focuses on opportunities to improve the quality of life for South Australians who are experiencing hardship across the four priority areas of the trust: increasing employment opportunities, improving the retention of young people in education, promoting financial wellbeing and providing appropriate and sustainable housing options.

Members have already spoken about the connections that The Wyatt Trust has with many not-for-profit organisations and the state government in terms of providing really good evidence-based and sustainable programs. I just want to contribute and say that I hope that this happens in a speedy way and that this fantastic organisation is able to do the work with the group of people who are currently, partially at least, excluded due to the wording. I support the passage of the bill while clearly outlining a small interest in the matter.

The Hon. V.A. CHAPMAN (Bragg—Deputy Premier, Attorney-General) (17:29): I wish to thank all those who have made a contribution to this debate. It is most pleasant to hear of the high regard across the chamber for The Wyatt Benevolent Institution Incorporated. It is a body that clearly has a high level of respect and appreciation across the board, not just in this parliament but of course in the community, which would attest to the extraordinary breadth of contribution that has been made for support in the community during the lifetime of this trust. I thank members for that and for an indication from the member for Badcoe of the opposition's support of the bill.

I just wish to make one comment before I move to refer the matter to a select committee, on the basis that the bill is a bill to amend a private act, which was established to provide for the perpetuity of this entity. The private act was assented to on 12 December 1935. We have a bill to amend that. A bill to amend a private act, on the face of it, would have good reason to be treated as a hybrid bill and therefore have the extra process that our standing orders demand of the scrutiny of such legislation.

I say that in the context of that being the broad parameter. What we are doing in this bill, however, is amending the charter of this entity, essentially to move away from the restriction that this trust currently affords distribution under to a more limited class, particularly to benefit the persons who are termed 'above the labouring class' or 'belong to a class above that of a labourer', to anyone in the community, and we are moving away from the need to determine whether a prospective recipient is 'of good moral character and conduct'.

There is equally an argument that in fact the effect of this bill is indeed to provide a primary and chief objective to promote the interests of the broader community, not The Wyatt Benevolent Institution. However, it is a matter for determination of this house, and we have a certain process that our standing orders require if we do do that.

I am advised that when the parliament determined the amendment to the Lady Kintore Cottages Act back in 2014, at that time legal advice had been obtained to suggest that that bill was not a hybrid bill; however, on the other hand I am advised that the house decided, notwithstanding that, that the bill be treated as a hybrid bill, and it was therefore the will of the house to refer it to a committee. I am immensely grateful to the staff of the parliament—what is your official position David?

The CLERK: Deputy Clerk.

The Hon. V.A. CHAPMAN: Aren't you the keeper of the rod or something as well?

The CLERK: No.

The Hon. V.A. CHAPMAN: No? I thought you had some other grand title; sorry—to the Deputy Clerk. He probably deserves a much more grand title because he does such wonderful work. I am immensely grateful to him and his indication of two things: firstly, some work has been done to undertake the assessment of this bill being a hybrid bill; and, secondly, his commitment to look into some other areas of reform, particularly our universities, which, as members may know, have their statutory base by acts of this parliament. I do appreciate that.

As small comfort to the house, I think it is fair to say that we have also had the benefit of someone who has been a very valuable aid to this parliament in the past—that is, Mr Richard Dennis, who was the former parliamentary counsel for many years. He now sits as a director of the Wyatt Benevolent Institution, and I am sure that he is a very valuable asset to them, and I understand that he was also the author of the letter of request to the parliament to make the amendments consistent with the contents of the bill we are discussing.

It is apparently his view that this could be treated as a hybrid bill and, with that weighty support, I assume it may be on that basis that there is an acceptance that, whilst the act deals with a certain class and the primary and chief object (if we use that sort of phraseology) is to promote the interests of the WBI, it could well be argued that in fact broadening the base upon which someone might be eligible for a benefit under this entity has a primary chief objective to the broader community. Be that as it may, I doubtless will have some further advice from the Deputy Clerk, and obviously we will try to make sure that we have some consistency.

Members may be aware that there are very many of these private acts and, indeed, entities that were established to basically set the structure around many of our educational institutions, churches, charities and trusts. Just so that members do not think there is going to be an explosion of these, the fact is that in the last hundred years they have very much diminished because the practice of coming to the parliament to seek the umbrella of a statute is a fashion that has passed.

Probably the reason that is most likely is that the work of the parliament in dealing with public legislation has certainly expanded. Secondly, by virtue of the establishment of corporations law, associations law and the like, we have set up the structural umbrella within which many of these entities, churches, schools, trusts and the like, can set up and have all the protections, legal sanctions and entitlements via those structures and not have the inconvenience of coming back themselves and begging the indulgence of the parliament to change their own rules.

The autonomy and the protection of these entities now have a different crucible, and long may that reign. Nevertheless, we have the legacy of them, and of course we are more than happy to deal with them. I am happy to indicate in due course, if it has not already been conveyed to the parliament, the names of a potential membership of a hybrid select committee. I will do that whenever you suggest I do so.

Bill read a second time.

The ACTING SPEAKER (Mr Cowdrey): This bill amends The Wyatt Benevolent Institution Incorporated Act 1935, which was introduced into the Legislative Council as a private member's bill to provide, furthermore, effectual incorporation of The Wyatt Benevolent Institution Incorporated and to facilitate the carrying out of the trusts of the will of the late William Wyatt and for other purposes.

In accordance with joint standing order (private bills) No. 2, I rule that this amending legislation's chief object is to promote the interests of one local body—namely, The Wyatt Benevolent Institution Incorporated—and not those of local bodies generally. As it has been introduced by the government in accordance with the precedence established by the house in the application of joint standing orders, The Wyatt Benevolent Institution Incorporated (Objects) Amendment Bill is a hybrid bill within the meaning of joint standing order (private bills) No. 2.

Referred to Select Committee

The Hon. V.A. CHAPMAN (Bragg—Deputy Premier, Attorney-General) (17:39): I move:

That this bill be referred to a select committee pursuant to joint standing order (private bills) No. 2.

Motion carried.

The Hon. V.A. CHAPMAN: I move:

That a committee be appointed consisting of Mr Ellis, Mrs Power, Ms Stinson, Mr Szakacs and Mr Teague.

Motion carried.

The Hon. V.A. CHAPMAN: I move:

That the committee have the power to send for persons, papers and records, to adjourn from place to place, and that the committee report back by 25 March 2020.

Motion carried.

The Hon. V.A. CHAPMAN: I move:

That standing order 339 be and remain so far suspended as to enable the select committee to authorise the disclosure or publication, as it sees fit, of any evidence presented to the committee prior to such evidence being reported to the house.

The ACTING SPEAKER (Mr Cowdrey): An absolute majority not being present, ring the bells.

An absolute majority of the whole number of members being present:

Motion carried.