Why is the statement of compatibility made before the second reading?

[Sarah P]

So for my outcome, we need to state why the statement of compatibility for a certain Bill was made prior to the second reading. Only problem is that my textbook doesn't have the answer and I can't find it on the internet either. Any help is much appreciated 

[meganrobyn]

So for my outcome, we need to state why the statement of compatibility for a certain Bill was made prior to the second reading. Only problem is that my textbook doesn't have the answer and I can't find it on the internet either. Any help is much appreciated 

If it's state parliament, it's whether the bill is compatible (or not) with the state Charter of Rights and Responsibilities; if federal, it's whether the bill is compatible (or not) with a number of UN rights treaties. Neither bill *needs* to be compatible - it's for information only.

[upandgo]

If it's state parliament, it's whether the bill is compatible (or not) with the state Charter of Rights and Responsibilities; if federal, it's whether the bill is compatible (or not) with a number of UN rights treaties. Neither bill *needs* to be compatible - it's for information only.

just a quick question, in the federal parliament would a MP's bill be also compared with the human rights (parliamentary scrutiny) act to assess it's degree of compatibility? my teacher said it would but since you didnt mention that i thought to double check  .

[meganrobyn]

just a quick question, in the federal parliament would a MP's bill be also compared with the human rights (parliamentary scrutiny) act to assess it's degree of compatibility? my teacher said it would but since you didnt mention that i thought to double check  .

I think either your teacher misunderstands, or you've misunderstood your teacher! That Act is the one that made statements of compatibility compulsory (technically, semi-compulsory) in the first place. It doesn't actually protect any rights itself.

The best way is to get comfortable checking the wording of the legislation and court judgments yourself, because you frequently find that paraphrases you've heard or read are wrong (eg Roach case classic example).

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/hrsa2011409/s3.html#human_rights

Discussion if interested: http://www.unswlawjournal.unsw.edu.au/sites/default/files/g8_rajanayagam.pdf

And you can click on any current bill and read the actual statement itself: http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_before_Parliament

[upandgo]

I think either your teacher misunderstands, or you've misunderstood your teacher! That Act is the one that made statements of compatibility compulsory (technically, semi-compulsory) in the first place. It doesn't actually protect any rights itself.

The best way is to get comfortable checking the wording of the legislation and court judgments yourself, because you frequently find that paraphrases you've heard or read are wrong (eg Roach case classic example).

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/hrsa2011409/s3.html#human_rights

Discussion if interested: http://www.unswlawjournal.unsw.edu.au/sites/default/files/g8_rajanayagam.pdf

And you can click on any current bill and read the actual statement itself: http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_before_Parliament

thanks heaps for the clarification! he did say that it was (he even said to put it in our sac  ) but i'll definitely make a note not to do this in the future.