Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Sittings . . . . PDF . . . . Video

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2010 Week 12 Hansard (Wednesday, 27 October 2010) . . Page.. 5186 ..


(7) Omit paragraph (2), substitute:

“(2) notes:

(a) that the ACT Government will make further submissions to the Authority on behalf of the ACT, seeking preservation of the ACT’s current diversion limit and raising its other concerns; and

(b) the Government will commission, as necessary, expert or professional advice to support its representations about the impact on the ACT;”.

(8) Omit paragraph (3), substitute:

“(3) notes the Government will keep the Assembly and the community informed on progress on the matters raised every six months until after the final plan is released.”.

MR ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Mr Hargreaves): For clarification, Mr Rattenbury, you moved an amendment to Mr Corbell’s original amendment.

Mr Rattenbury: I did.

MR ASSISTANT SPEAKER: Does this mean that your amendment now amends Mr Corbell’s second revised amendment?

Mr Rattenbury: Yes, that is the case and I moved them together.

MR ASSISTANT SPEAKER: Thank you very much. The question then is that Mr Rattenbury’s amendments to all of Mr Corbell’s amendments to Mrs Dunne’s motion be agreed to..

MR SESELJA (Molonglo—Leader of the Opposition) (4.22): Speaking briefly to Mr Rattenbury’s amendments, I think there is a real concern—and I think Mrs Dunne addressed it very well—about the Greens’ attitude to this issue. I am glad to see that, as a result of some of the urgings and the pressure put on the minister by Mrs Dunne, Minister Corbell seems to have taken a slightly different tack today in relation to the territory’s important interest in this process.

I will address a couple of those issues. We need to put into context what we are dealing with here. Mr Rattenbury said in his speech that we needed to contribute and the like. The reality is that we are. I think it is arguable to say that, when it comes to the Murray-Darling Basin, we punch well above our weight in terms of our contribution to water efficiency and the use of water in the basin. We divert only around half a per cent of the total water in the basin; yet we are 17 per cent of the basin’s population.

We pay far more for our water than anywhere else in the basin. We are using much less, we are paying much more, we have already agreed to what could be argued to be a very restrictive cap and now we are being told that is not enough. We have been the good citizens. We have been the good citizens for a long time on this and I think it is


Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Sittings . . . . PDF . . . . Video