Page 3027 - Week 10 - Tuesday, 14 September 1993

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


Mr Humphries: Who is "we"?

MR MOORE: I am using the royal plural. I must say that there is a retrospectivity that will apply in one sense, but it is the same retrospectivity that normally applies in any Bill involving money when the Minister announces that something is going to happen as at 5 o'clock today. I am quite happy to support the legislation, which effectively works from 5 o'clock today. The only sorrow I have is that it was not 5 o'clock on a day early in 1989, after the first Follett Government was elected.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Sitting suspended from 4.47 to 8.00 pm

LITTER (AMENDMENT) BILL 1993

Debate resumed from 17 June 1993, on motion by Mr Connolly:

That this Bill be agreed to in principle.

MR DE DOMENICO (8.01): Madam Speaker, the Litter Act 1977, the principal Act, establishes various littering offences and also provides the method of enforcement. My research did not go back as far as 1977, but I am advised that the person responsible for the setting up of the first Litter Act in 1977 was Mr Kaine when he was a member of a previous house. Take a bow, Mr Kaine. It is no wonder that the Liberal Party will not be opposing the Litter (Amendment) Bill, because it is based on such a fine piece of legislation introduced by Mr Kaine. One wonders whether all pieces of legislation ought to be introduced by Liberals. It would save this Assembly a heck of a lot more time.

Madam Speaker, I would like to thank the Minister for Urban Services, Mr Connolly, for holding up the passage of this Bill until the Liberal Party had an opportunity to complete extensive consultations with the industry on the proposed changes. The Liberal Party conducts consultation as a matter of course - unlike other parties that will not be mentioned but that we know all about - on all the issues before it. We know exactly the amount of consultation undertaken by the Government. All too often, Madam Speaker, there has been limited consultation of a shallow nature - consultation for the sake of being seen to consult, rather than consultation for the sake of listening to the people and businesses that the Government's laws will affect.

Unfortunately, again, all the people we spoke to saw this Bill for the first time when we, the Liberal Party, sent it to them. For this reason I am grateful that the Minister allowed me the time to undertake this meaningful consultative process. I have spoken to and corresponded with all community groups in Canberra that have an interest in this area.

Mr Lamont: Name them.


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