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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1996 Week 14 Hansard (12 December) . . Page.. 4843 ..

Motion (by Mr Moore) put:

That the debate be adjourned.

The Assembly voted -

AYES, 3	 		NOES, 11

Ms Horodny	Mr Berry	Ms McRae
Mr Moore	Mrs Carnell	Ms Reilly
Ms Tucker	Mr Cornwell	Mr Stefaniak
		Mr De Domenico	Mr Whitecross
		Mr Humphries	Mr Wood
		Mr Kaine

MR MOORE (4.43): Mr Speaker, some would argue that my moving the adjournment of the debate was a filibuster. Indeed, it was not. It was a very important part of what I would like to achieve. Mr Speaker, this Bill is a sprawling, convoluted collection of changes to our planning laws. This Bill of 127 clauses, together with at least 70 amendments to be moved by the Minister and other members as well as by me, is being debated in the pressurised atmosphere of a last sitting day. It calls into question our own professionalism as members of parliament. I will be arguing that it is grossly irresponsible for us to proceed with this Bill today. However, if members insist on continuing the debate - and I understand that they will - I will be doing my best to ensure that any legislation which emerges from this appalling procedure will do the least possible damage.

Mr Speaker, it gives me pleasure to speak following the incredible doublespeak from the Labor Party. It can be described in no other way, as we seek to protect community rights, we seek to protect leasehold, we seek to have it granted properly - we seek to do all these things, until we get to the detail stage of the Bill, when these things are being undermined, and Labor has indicated that it will be supporting the undermining.

Mr Speaker, there is a very limited amount of time in which to consider this law. The Minister no doubt believes that his exposure draft of seven weeks ago constitutes adequate consultation. We certainly were pleased to receive it. However, there were significant variations and policy shifts in that time. Only the final draft represents the changes that the Government would have us actually make to the law. So, do not let me hear what I have been hearing Mr Humphries say - that we have had much more than three weeks in which to prepare for debate on these provisions.

Mr Humphries: You have.

MR MOORE: He interjects that we have; but, indeed, Mr Speaker, we have not. What we have had is the legislation tabled at the previous sitting. During that time we had one week.

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