Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2008 Week 4 Hansard (8 April) . . Page.. 1082..
DR FOSKEY (continuing):
It is an intergovernmental agreement, and I agree that that could be an issue. But perhaps, instead of throwing away the amendment and throwing away the process of review, we should look at how we can conduct that review on an even playing field. Also, we need to realise that this legislation will be being reviewed at the commonwealth level; thus there is always the opportunity for it to be changed anyway, depending on the complexion of the commonwealth government.
Like Ms Gallagher, I would be concerned if we were thinking, "Well, a different kind of government is going to throw this out all together,"when so much painstaking trouble has been gone to to make a regime that protects the concerns of all the players involved, including the eggs themselves. I do not propose this sunset amendment lightly. I think that the concerns that have been raised by people in the community, by the opposition and by me are worthy enough to be the basis for review. For that reason I do commend the amendment.
That proposed new clause 36A be agreed to.
The Assembly voted—
Question so resolved in the negative.
Proposed new clause 36A negatived.
Reminder of bill, by leave, taken as a whole and agreed to.
Bill agreed to.
Unit Titles Amendment Bill 2007
Debate resumed from 6 December 2007, on motion by Mr Barr:
That this bill be agreed to in principle.
MR SESELJA (Molonglo—Leader of the Opposition) (12.11): The opposition will be supporting the Unit Titles Amendment Bill 2007. We will not be proposing any amendments, since this is a relatively straightforward proposal, but I will speak just briefly to the bill.
This bill simplifies existing arrangements and provides a balanced approach to dealing with cases where minor attachments to buildings encroach over public land. The