I am not going to delay either the House or the Minister on this section. Of course, the Minister has a point when he says this is mentioned in the budget. However, he will appreciate that my protest on the form of the section is meant to be part of a recurring one on my part against legislation by reference where there is something substantive, even if it is only a continuation. In this case the Minister has a good point in saying that he did mention in the budget what the facts would be but, unfortunately, the Acts are the law and it is highly desirable that the content of a section wherever possible should be made clear.
Section 9 stands out in sharp contrast with section 10 where, of course, it is necessary to set out the table, but if section 9 were so worded that the rate would appear on the face of it, then section 10 has all the greater meaning. Persons who have to advert to legislation of this nature, after all, even if the Minister did say it on the budget, do not all remember everything that the Minister is saying and whether it is management in business, trade union or other organisations which have an interest in the matter, or whether it is even these people who have to transmit the information either to specific groups or to the public at large, for the sake of all these people it would be highly desirable that legislation involving something substantive like this should show on the face of it what it is.
I will not add any more to this. I can see that in this case the Minister has a stronger answer to me than he might have in some other cases but, nevertheless, the residue remains.