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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2011 Week 13 Hansard (Thursday, 17 November 2011) . . Page.. 5574 ..


As well as the two chief initiatives that I have outlined extensively, PABLAB No 2 also makes a minor amendment to a piece of environment legislation. Clause 16 of the bill contains a minor technical amendment to section 5 of the Plastic Shopping Bags Ban Regulation 2011. This regulation defines that biodegradable plastic bags are defined according to Australian standard 4736-2006 as in force from time to time. This amendment makes it clear that changes to this standard do not need to be notified on the ACT Legislation Register.

This bill is another example of the government providing practical and expedient responses to issues. This bill is part of the government’s ongoing efforts to improve the territory’s planning system to meet the needs of the local economy, industry, the environment and, most importantly, the community. The bill is another important building block in the continuing development of modern and accessible planning laws that are at the leading edge in Australia. It is vital that we continue to implement the highest standard of planning policies, laws and principles to ensure that Canberra grows successfully into the future. With that little sojourn back into planning nerd-dom, Madam Assistant Speaker, I commend the bill to the Assembly.

Debate (on motion by Mr Smyth) adjourned to the next sitting.

Auditor-General—appointment

Motion to disallow

MR SMYTH (Brindabella) (4.06): I move:

That Disallowable Instrument DI2011-155, being the Auditor-General Appointment 2011 (No 1), be disallowed.

This is a very important disallowance motion, and I urge all members to consider the validity of the case that I am about to present. What we have had in this whole sorry saga is poor process. Indeed, the poor process is validated by the report this morning that was delivered by the committee, where the committee says in the first of its recommendations that we:

... develop a resolution of continuing effect on how the executive and legislature should deal with the consideration of statutory appointments …

It goes on to say:

… until the resolution is agreed to, the executive not release publicly the names of any person that is to be considered by an Assembly Committee.

I think that is a condemnation, nicely phrased, of the process that has been followed. Recommendation 2 also says that we should look at section 8 of the Auditor-General Act, which relates to the powers the public accounts committee has in relation to this matter. No matter how this is looked at—and it is not about the candidate, and I am sure this will be characterised as some sort of attack on the nominee—this is about the poor process the Chief Minister followed, some of her actions and the discussions that


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