Page 2820 - Week 13 - Wednesday, 22 November 1989

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .


matter there will be provision for committees such as this to advise the Government on the environmental issues and other issues that arise during the processing of proposals through the planning system leading to approval or rejection of such proposals.

To graft such a committee as this onto the existing unsatisfactory arrangements - admitted by the Government to be unsatisfactory because it is proposing to change them - would be an unusual step, to say the least, and I would think would merely confuse the issue rather than clarify it.

I believe that the proper course of action is for the Chief Minister to bring forward her planning proposals so that they can be considered by this Assembly, and that part of those proposals ought to be the proposition that such a committee or such a council, whatever it is to be called, should be integral to that process. To try to debate it in isolation now, in anticipation of what the ultimate planning process arrangements might be, is premature and pointless.

MR WHALAN (Deputy Chief Minister) (11.07): This blatant attempt to gag discussion on this important issue just cannot be tolerated by the chamber. Once again, we are in the middle of an important debate, and there are other speakers who wish to make their contribution after members opposite have had their opportunity. They have had their chance. So they give themselves a go, but then seek to adjourn the debate, apply the gag and prevent the opportunity for others to participate in the debate and to comment upon this proposal which is of fundamental importance for the future planning and development issues in this Territory. This is completely without any form of consultation with other members in the Assembly, and springing it on in this manner by applying the gag must be rejected. It is repugnant to free speech in the Assembly and must be rejected by the Assembly on this occasion.

MR HUMPHRIES (11.08): I think Mr Kaine's motion is entirely in order and appropriate, and I find it strange that the Government should be coming forward today and saying that it is not prepared to allow this matter to go over, to allow, in effect, further time for consultation of a kind which this Government constantly talks about and constantly implores the Assembly to provide for.

The fact is that Mr Moore's motion has had very little notice. Mr Moore has written, I understand, to a large number of organisations, including trade unions, employer organisations and other interest groups, asking them for response to his proposals. I have not yet even seen any of those responses and I have not heard Mr Moore explain to me that any of them in any substantive way have been set out before him. I think it is therefore appropriate that this Assembly have further time to examine those kinds of implications and to see what those people have to say.


Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .