- Home
- Hansard & Papers
- Legislative Assembly
- 3 May 2005
Civil Liability Amendment (Food Donations) Bill
Printing Tips |
Print selected text
| Full Day Hansard Transcript
« Prior Item |
Item 40 of 45
| Next Item »
Page: 15445
Second Reading
Debate resumed from 8 December 2004.
Mr ANDREW TINK (Epping) [7.30 p.m.]: The purpose of this bill is to amend the Civil Liability Act 2002 to provide that a person does not incur civil liability for any death or personal injury resulting from the consumption of food donated by the person if the food has been donated in good faith for a charitable purpose with the intention that the consumer of the food would not have to pay for it, the food was safe to consume at the time it left the possession or control of the donor, and the donor has informed the person to whom the food is donated of any relevant food handling requirements or time limit for its consumption. The provisions of the bill will operate in the climate of concern over civil liability generally, and it will deal with the liability of charities and those who, in good faith, collect and distribute food for charitable purposes. I am sure that every member of this House knows many charitable groups and donors in their electorates who contribute very generously to appeals to which this bill relates. There are certainly donors in my electorate.
In the aftermath of the recent tsunami, the support for victims not only by the donation of money but also by donations in kind was absolutely extraordinary. Local retail food outlets donated to the Society of St Vincent De Paul, Sri Lankan charities, and other groups that were organising very vigorously, energetically and effectively to send food to Sri Lanka and other countries along the Indian Ocean rim that suffered so badly from the tsunami. To the extent that there is doubt about the existing law and certainly to the extent that concern has been expressed about the adequacy of the existing law, it is only right that this amending bill should be introduced, even if it does not greatly advance the present legal position.
Often it is important that there is a perception of safety as well as the reality of safety. To the extent that concern has been expressed about the perception of civil liability, it is important to allay that concern with affirmative action, which is what this bill does. Notwithstanding that legislation may already substantially be in place, instead of leaving the law open to argument, chance, or doubt, and instead of leaving doubt in the minds of people who want to be generous and help others, it is appropriate that this bill was introduced to put civil liability in relation to food donation beyond doubt. For those reasons, the Opposition will support the bill.
Ms VIRGINIA JUDGE (Strathfield) [7.33 p.m.]: I support the Civil Liability Amendment (Food Donations) Bill and commend the Minister, the Hon. Bob Debus, and his hardworking staff for their preparation of this legislation. The bill amends the Civil Liability Act 2002 to limit the liability of food donors. Provided that food is safe to be consumed when it leaves the possession of the donor, donors will be protected from civil liability in circumstances in which they have donated food in good faith for a charitable purpose or, in other words, when it was the donor's intention that the recipient would not have to pay for the food. When food is required to be handled in a particular way to ensure that it remains safe for consumption, the donor will have an obligation to inform the person to whom the food is given about the necessary handling requirements. Moreover, if food is safe to consume only for a particular period, the donor must inform the recipient of the time limit.
The bill will clarify the responsibility of food donors, many of whom are reluctant to donate owing to a perceived lack of protection against a civil liability claim. I understand that similar legislation passed by the Victorian Parliament has had a significant impact on the number of food donations subsequently made. One charitable organisation, One Umbrella, has reported that whereas prior to the introduction of the legislation it produced and distributed approximately 40,000 meals in Melbourne, the number of meals increased to 75,000 after the legislation was passed, so the legislation made a substantial difference to those who need the food. Some companies and charities do not donate food because of a perceived fear that they may be subject to civil proceedings for death or injury resulting from the consumption of that food. That perception is quite widespread.
Coincidentally, last night I attended a function held by the Exodus Foundation in the Ashfield part of my electorate of Strathfield. The Exodus Foundation is located on Liverpool Road next to the Polish Club. In the past I have been to the foundation's premises when it has served its many wonderful meals to homeless people. I have also observed the great work the foundation does in preparing and distributing Christmas hampers. However, the distribution of donated food is only one aspect of the work of the foundation. It also has classes for young people who experience difficulties with schooling or truancy; it provides intense courses to assist students to master skills that for a number of reasons they have been unable to acquire in the traditional school setting. In more recent years the foundation has adopted a one-stop approach to assisting homeless people by providing dental services, counselling and other forms of assistance. But I digress.
I contacted the Reverend Bill Crews when this bill was first introduced, and he told me that the Exodus Foundation provides approximately 100,000 meals per year—not just sandwiches or snacks but breakfasts and hot meals. It has always relied on donations of food and rostered volunteers to serve or distribute the food and clean up. Without this legislation, the foundation has sometimes had difficulty in persuading organisations to donate food because of the potential for litigation. Reverend Crews told me the bill will go a long way toward addressing that reticence. Although it is hard to imagine, he also told me that many people who come to the Exodus Foundation usually have only $20 left after they have paid their rent, utilities and medical expenses, and approximately one-third of them are homeless. When we think about people having only $20 dollars, and that even a cup of coffee costs a few dollars, we can appreciate that some people must be pretty desperate. They must eagerly look forward to having a nicely prepared meal.
The bill will assist the most vulnerable, often overlooked, and marginalised people in our society. I am sure that all members agree that it is part of our role as elected representatives to ensure that we make every effort to reach out to everyone, but particularly to those who are sometimes overlooked. The bill will also reduce some of the cost borne by charities because it will encourage people to make donations more freely. The bill will also make the law more transparent and accessible to the broader community and reassure businesses that the donation of safe food will not expose them to a civil liability claim.
Earlier this evening when one of the Minister's excellent staff members contacted me, I thought of the many occasions on which food is thrown away because it is in excess of requirements—for example, when a corporation hosts a large function that for some reason, perhaps inclement weather, has to be cancelled. It would be great if someone could collect that food and distribute it to those who need it. What about the food that is left behind after a function in our dining room at Parliament House? A member of the Minister's staff told me she knew there was a charity, but could not remember its name, that collects unwanted food. She mentioned another group, OzHarvest. I will check its web page and find out whom that group comprises and what it does. I understand that OzHarvest is a registered charity comprised of volunteers who collect food, including food donated by prestigious restaurants. Imagine what that food would be like! Some of the food could end up at the Matthew Talbot Hostel or any other places supported by the organisation. I am sure the recipients appreciate the quality of that food.
Perhaps there are other organisations of which I am not aware. I commend OzHarvest for taking the initiative and doing wonderful work to help people. I have been waiting for this bill to be introduced and I will make sure that Bill Crews and Michael know it is to be passed through this House tonight. Hopefully it will pass through Parliament very quickly and more people will become aware that they can donate excess food to help those who do not have a hot breakfast, lunch or dinner. If people have a full tummy, they feel better able to cope with other problems. I commend the bill to the House.
Mrs JUDY HOPWOOD (Hornsby) [7.41 p.m.]: I have been waiting for some time to speak to the Civil Liability Amendment (Food Donations) Bill. Its overview states:
The object of this Bill is to amend the Civil Liability Act 2002 to provide that a person does not incur civil liability for any death or personal injury resulting from the consumption of food donated by the person if:
(a) the food has been donated in good faith for a charitable purpose with the intention that the consumer of the food would not have to pay for it, and
(b) the food was safe to consume at the time it left the possession or control of the donor, and
(c) the donor has informed the person to whom the food is donated of any relevant food handling requirements or time limit for its consumption.
Honourable members know that there are many recipients of food donations, including the St Vincent de Paul Society, the Salvation Army, church groups and fetes. Most recently food donations were made to the tsunami appeal. In my electorate the small but vibrant Brooklyn Public School regularly publishes a newsletter, and at the end of last year the newsletter had a letter from the then Hornsby Ku-ring-gai Lifeline and Community Aid Inc., written by the Manager Counselling Services and dated 22 November 2004. It said:
We are writing with an urgent request for your support of Lifeline Hornsby Ku-ring-gai's Emergency Relief Service.
This service provides a range of welfare assistance to families in the Hornsby Ku-ring-gai municipalities. One form of assistance we provide is food parcels for families who, for any number of reasons, are currently unable to buy enough food for their basic meals. At present we are being inundated with families and needing food parcels as well as other assistance, and we have been providing up to 30 bags of food a week. Our welfare food cupboard is now virtually empty. We are not talking about food for an exciting event such as Christmas lunch, we are talking about food for one good meal a day when children come home from school.
In the past Lifeline has been able to keep up with the demand for food through the support of a couple of local churches whose congregations kindly donate tins of food etc. Our food parcels usually consist of items such as tins of meat, fish, tomatoes, vegetables, pasta sauces, pasta, rice and tins of fruit.
We would like all children and families of your school to kindly consider bringing in one non perishable item of food over the next two weeks and then to possibly consider doing this once a term. If you were able to assist Lifeline in this way we would be extremely grateful, as would the disadvantaged families in our local area, who our service supports.
With kind regards and many thanks for your continued support of Lifeline.
That is a very good example of what the donation of food can do to alleviate some community need. I support the bill.
Mr DARYL MAGUIRE (Wagga Wagga) [7.44 p.m.]: I could not sit here without making a contribution to this debate. The contributions of honourable members indicate that the bill will be supported. The honourable member for Strathfield rightly referred to the people who, night after night, line up at kitchens dotted around Sydney to receive a warm meal that quite often comprises donated food. Some nights when I walk home from Parliament House I almost have to step over homeless people who have had a meal at the Cathedral Street food depot or in Martin Place and then sleep on the steps of this place. Much of that food is donated. Voluntary feeding of homeless people happens not only in Sydney but also across the State. In my home town of Wagga Wagga food is donated for all sorts of purposes, and obviously that is appreciated by the recipients.
In Wagga Wagga, Mica House serves meals to the homeless and to those with mental health conditions who have nowhere else to go and who depend on the services provided by Mica House. Much of that food is donated. Many people who sleep in the streets and access the food distributed by volunteers—those who give their time, or money—and members of this House may not ever realise and appreciate the contributions, the commitment and the dedication continually given by those volunteers. As we sit in this Chamber, having left our fine dining room, volunteers are supplying warm meals to people who have nowhere else to go.
Until recently, many of those who are now homeless did have somewhere to live; they were provided with a roof over their head, with a warm meal and a clean bed. It is a great tragedy that in the past 10 years under the Carr Government people have been forced to live on the streets. No real action has been taken to remedy that growing problem. Each night that I walk past those homeless people I am terribly troubled that I see no improvement in their plight. In fact, the lines are getting longer and the requests for donations are becoming greater. Yet, the honourable member for Strathfield said that the bill will make it easier for people to donate more food to feed the homeless. I would have preferred honourable members to recognise that the Government needs to do more to live up to the expectations of the people of this State.
The Government should acknowledge and resolve the problems—through appropriate funding and housing—of those in need, particularly those with mental health problems. Between 75 and 80 per cent of people who wander our streets and access these services receive food that is donated. We all want to see a reduction in the number of homeless people and people who rely on donated food, but it is not happening. All we have heard tonight is rhetoric. Sadly, in debate after debate all we hear is rhetoric; we are offered no firm solutions. All honourable members should support this reasonable legislation. In country areas food is prepared with good intention to support causes, whether it be a tsunami appeal, a Country Women's Association stall or a charity fundraiser for a footballer who has been injured in a game. Tragedies occur all across this State, and when they do communities rise to the occasion and work to ensure that those affected are adequately cared for. Much of that is done through the donation of food.
As I said, the Civil Liability Amendment (Food Donations) Bill is appropriate. Honourable members make grand speeches in this Chamber in which they encourage people to give more but it is appalling that they do not take action in this place to address problems that continually plague those who are living on our streets. People in my electorate are living under bridges but there is no attempt by this Government to address that issue. Last week a member of my staff rang me and said that two gentlemen had approached my office, as they are entitled to do and as I encourage them to do. When they were asked what was their problem they said that they did not have anywhere to live. My staff asked them their current address and their response was, "Unit 1 under the bridge." That is appalling in New South Wales in 2005.
I encourage legislation such as this that helps the donors of food and those who are assisting others. The challenge to the Minister, to the Carr Government, and to Government members is to help remedy the problems and reduce the lines of homeless people that other honourable members and I walk past every night. We step over people every night when we leave Parliament House. We must ensure that they have food in their bellies and warm and clean beds in which to sleep.
Mr BOB DEBUS (Blue Mountains—Attorney General, and Minister for the Environment) [7.52 p.m.], in reply: I thank honourable members for their contributions to the debate on this bill. Although I commend the honourable member for Wagga Wagga for his evident personal compassion I suggest to him that the problem of homelessness is rather more complex than he acknowledged. This bill is about civil liability, not mental health, which is another and more complex issue altogether. The bill does not relate to the policies of the Federal Government with respect, say, to public housing.
If we are to deal with the wider questions of homelessness we must, as the honourable member said, do so by other than mouthing platitudes. That will involve us in an examination of a wide range of government policy. This bill is a mere commonsense reform to benefit charitable organisations across New South Wales. Its aim is to provide businesses that support the work of charities through food donations with some kind of a framework within which they can set out their rights and responsibilities and be assured that they are protected from liability when they meet those responsibilities.
The bill will almost certainly significantly increase the number of hot meals and food parcels provided by charities to those in need. For some charities an increase in the amount of food donated will generate significant savings through not having to buy so much food, and those savings can be used to help people in difficult circumstances in other ways—through the payment of school fees, electricity bills, or whatever it might be. In Committee the Government will move an amendment that is uncontroversial and addresses the concern of some charities that their work in donating food might not be covered by the bill. The amendment will remove any doubt as to whether the bill covers the valuable work of charities that are part of a chain of donations—who receive donated food and distribute it. Again, I thank all honourable members for their contributions and I commend the bill.
Motion agreed to.
Bill read a second time.
In Committee
Clauses 1 to 3 agreed to.
Mr BOB DEBUS (Blue Mountains—Attorney General, and Minister for the Environment) [7.56 p.m.]: I move Government amendment No. 1:
No. 1 Page 3, schedule 1 [1]. Insert after line 7:
donate food includes distribute, without payment or other reward, food donated by others.
As I said, the amendment addresses a concern that the work of a number of charities that use donated food might not be covered by the bill. The concern arises because those charities are not primary donors of the food; rather they receive food donations from the public or from businesses and donate it or distribute it to those in need or to other charities. For instance, a charity might collect excess food from a corporate function and distribute it to a soup kitchen or to a hostel for the homeless. Another example is where a charity collects tinned food donated by members of the public during a winter appeal and gives it to families in need. Since we are so concerned to ensure that charities feel safe in that circumstance we are intent on removing any doubt that the bill covers the valuable work of charities that are part of a chain of donation.
Amendment agreed to.
Schedule 1 as amended agreed to.
Bill reported from Committee with an amendment and passed through remaining stages.
Last modified 05/12/2007 16:33:19 : Update this page