Legislative Council Fifty-Fourth Parliament, Second Session (54-2) 54 2 Parliament of South Australia Legislative Council published Bills South Australian Employment Tribunal (Costs) Amendment Bill South Australian Employment Tribunal (Costs) Amendment Bill South Australian Employment Tribunal (Costs) Amendment Bill Second Reading Second Reading Adjourned debate on second reading. (Continued from 12 November 2020.) The Hon. K.J. MAHER Legislative Council Leader of the Opposition The Hon. K.J. MAHER (Leader of the Opposition) (17:16): I rise to speak briefly on this bill and indicate that I am the lead speaker for the opposition. The bill amends one provision of the South Australian Employment Tribunal Act 2014 essentially, for the avoidance of doubt, to explicitly allow them to award costs for or against a party in criminal proceedings. According to section 6A(4) of the South Australian Employment Tribunal Act, the employment court has jurisdiction to deal with summary offences or minor indictable offences. This power to hear criminal matters was transferred to the South Australian Employment Tribunal from the Magistrates Court in 2017. Section 6A of the act states that the court has jurisdiction to deal with these offences in the same way as the Magistrates Court would deal with the charge and in accordance with the Summary Procedure Act 1921. This is subject to any exclusion or modifications in the regulations. The bill adds that the court would deal with criminal matters according to the Summary Procedure Act: …including the provisions of that Act, allowing an award of costs for or against a party to criminal proceedings We have been informed that the government has received advice that raised the fact that this could cast doubt on the Employment Tribunal's power to award costs. Hence, this bill has been introduced to clarify that costs may be awarded by the Employment Tribunal in their criminal jurisdiction. This ensures that successful parties cannot be denied costs being awarded and mitigated for their losses, which would have otherwise been allowed without any avoidance of doubt in the Magistrates Court. The government is backdating the bill to apply the costs that have been made since the transfer of powers in 2017. We are informed that the bill seeks to address a finite number—that is 18—existing orders, averaging slightly over $2,000, which in effect will not be able to be challenged and will apply to all future awarding of costs. The opposition supports this bill. Debate adjourned on motion of Hon. T.J. Stephens.