Page 350 - Week 02 - Wednesday, 10 February 2021
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
needs of the territory into the future, and the most suitable locations to see new facilities developed.
The government will continue to work with private waste companies to deliver the ACT government’s waste strategy and identify appropriate land to establish required facilities. The move by the ACT government today is not anti-business. We consider this decision to be about protecting the existing businesses in Fyshwick, many of which have been undergoing a transformation in recent years.
While it is still appropriate for many industrial uses to continue in Fyshwick, I note that Fyshwick continues to evolve, with many retail and light commercial businesses establishing there with strong customer followings. The move to ban waste facilities will protect these businesses and the surrounding residential suburbs from the negative impacts which could be realised from such large-scale facilities. I commend the bill to the Assembly.
Debate (on motion by Mr Hanson) adjourned to the next sitting.
Government Procurement (Secure Local Jobs) Code 2020
Motion to disallow
MR CAIN (Ginninderra) (10.21):
That Disallowable Instrument DI2020-278, being the Government Procurement (Secure Local Jobs) Code 2020, be disallowed.
I move this motion of disallowance, as there is a risk that the amendments to the previous code are inconsistent with commonwealth law and remain ambiguous in their interpretation. Documents released under FOI—freedom of information—have revealed that the previous Minister for Government Services and Procurement was briefed last year that the changes to section 15 may conflict with commonwealth legislation.
A ministerial brief to the minister in September last year, which was released, on my request, to an FOI query has, as its first recommendation, that there remains a risk that the proposed changes to section 15 of the Secure Local Jobs Code may conflict with the Fair Work Act. Discussions that my office has had, both internally and externally, indicate that there is some ambiguity and unclearness about the meaning of the changes to section 15 in this code. I am sure that all of us here recognise that a key role of this Assembly in serving the community is to pass law that is clear, unambiguous and certainly does not pose a significant risk of conflicting with commonwealth legislation.
The risk here lies in the potential for organisations to seek clarity over the terms included in section 15, particularly regarding the involvement of unions in the collective bargaining process where none of the employees of an organisation are members of a union. Litigation of this type would be lengthy and ultimately expensive for both local organisations and Canberra’s taxpayers. At best, these amendments are unnecessary and include language that is unclear and could easily be misconstrued.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video