Page 515 - Week 04 - Wednesday, 28 June 1989
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
As far as I am aware, none of my colleagues has had similar opportunities extended before now. Perhaps I am mistaken in that, but as far as I am aware that is the case. I hope that the Government's policy, as announced this afternoon as a new policy of this Government, to all intents and purposes, is adhered to because it will make instances such as what happened last night less frequent.
What happened last night was not a very desirable circumstance. We found ourselves having to adjourn the debate because agreement had not been reached on an important aspect of the legislation. In fact, no attempt had been made to reach agreement because no consultation had occurred on that question. Before this Government proceeds to tout about the community its openness and a willingness to discuss things like this with other people it ought to make sure that it sits down and discusses at least the implications of legislation such as this with the Opposition.
I am very pleased that a third level of offence, if you like, has been created in section 42 of the principal Act - that in a case somewhere between the picking of plants with special protection status and those without that status there is this additional tier, if you like, of picking of a plant which does not have special protection status but which the defendant intends to sell. I suppose that brings in the notion of commercial harvesting. I applaud that move on the part of the Government and will be supporting that.
MR COLLAERY (4.10): Mr Speaker, the Residents Rally has said enough on this issue, and I only need to draw a couple of points together to indicate in the passage of some of our first legislation the views, as I see it as Rally leader and perhaps as a practising lawyer, about some of the ways we have gone about it in the last day or two.
Mr Speaker, the Water Pollution Ordinance, the principal Act, confers a regulatory power on the Minister at section 47. Those of us who are familiar with legislation know that that gives a Minister power to make regulations not inconsistent with the ordinance, prescribing a range of matters, including prescribing penalties not exceeding $500 for offences against regulations.
The fact of the matter is that the standing orders of this Assembly, the legislation establishing this Assembly, give no power to this body to examine, as I understand it, regulations. Therefore, the Chief Minister and her Ministers have in their hands almost unprecedented regulatory power in the Australian Commonwealth. This is a very unsatisfactory situation. Whilst I am sure we have here - the Chief Minister looks surprised - benign legislation that we all support, it might change a little, and the Government may change its attitude a little if we move on to issues such as criminal laws where regulations could possibly be made affecting civil rights.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .