Page 4346 - Week 14 - Wednesday, 30 November 1994

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


vote against it, I suggest, with no thought whatsoever. I have brought this matter up in the Assembly in the past, and with good reason. The words of members in this Assembly on this very day prove that it was important. Mr Humphries said that the previous Bill before the Assembly today took a lot longer than the original Bill. That was another Bill that went through in a hurry. He said that he understood the urgency, but what about including non-urgent matters at the same time? That was a problem.

I think I can sum up by saying that the case for a requirement that there be a minimum time was best put by the members of this Assembly. I have said what the people in Canberra want. The majority of people have said that they want between 60 and 90 days. I took the lesser of the two, knowing the reaction of politicians in this Assembly. But nobody has come forward and said, "Look, let us make it a minimum of 30 days". That is at least reasonable, but nobody has done that. The majority of people in this community want the time to bring matters to their meetings. They want the time to seek advice on matters. They want the time to propose amendments. They want the time to hold public consultation. They want the time to have matters adequately discussed in the media. When you vote against this motion, including the different parts of it, you do not give them that time.

Question resolved in the negative, Mr Stevenson dissenting.

MADAM SPEAKER: Order! It being 12.30 pm, private members business is interrupted in accordance with standing order 77 as amended by temporary order.

Sitting suspended from 12.30 to 2.30 pm

QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE

Petrol Station Sites

MRS CARNELL: Madam Speaker, my question without notice is to the Minister for the Environment, Land and Planning. I remind the Minister that 2.00 pm today, 30 November, was the closing time for expressions of interest in the three new service station sites. I refer to the fact that applications were limited to certain persons, as defined in determination No. 22 of 1994 under the Land Act. A key eligibility requirement is proof that the applicant will act competitively in the retail petrol market. I therefore ask the Minister: What tests will he apply to satisfy himself, as the responsible Minister, that successful applicants will comply with the requirement to act competitively?

MR WOOD: Madam Speaker, the answer to the question from the Leader of the Opposition is basically "69, 76" - 69c being the price of petrol today and 76c being the price of petrol when this scheme was introduced. That remains the answer to all the questions that the Opposition want to ask about petrol station sites. Mrs Carnell did get it correct when she said that tenders closed at 2.00 pm. Obviously, I am as interested as anybody in the outcome of that, and to see what tenders have been received. I am waiting for a phone call. The main part of Mrs Carnell's question related to the criteria for deciding what is competitive and who will be competitive. As I think we indicated at the


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