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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2000 Week 3 Hansard (8 March) . . Page.. 718 ..

MR SMYTH (continuing):

performance audits. It is a solution that cleans it up and leaves no doubt. I circulate that amendment. As a consequence of that, clause 4 and the Schedule should be deleted. They are no longer necessary as a consequence of allowing the Auditor-General to do that job. I move:

MR CORBELL (5.05): Mr Speaker, the Labor Party is quite happy to support this amendment. I think that the issues have been overly canvassed. However, Mr Speaker, I must raise a concern. Does this amendment indicate that the Government is now supporting this Bill? Is it the Government's intention now to support this Bill? This morning Mr Smyth stood up and said that the Government saw no reason to support this Bill. This morning the Minister stood up and said, "We do all these things already and there is no reason to support this Bill". Is there now a change of mind from the Minister? What is going on, Mr Speaker? I am not very clear on that. Perhaps the Minister can clarify it.

I raise that concern simply because the Minister did not call for a vote in the in-principle stage, which would be the normal practice if you were opposed to the legislation, but he did not do that, Mr Speaker. I would just like some clarification of what is going on. I think it has been explained quite clearly that these proposals are not radical. Indeed, as Ms Tucker pointed out, there has been agreement nationally that these types of measures should be in place. Mr Smyth's action in standing up this morning and saying that the Government does all these things already and this Bill is not needed is not backed up by the stance taken by his Federal colleagues. Equally, it highlights the fact that this Government is developing the very bad reputation and this Minister is developing the very bad reputation of saying a lot and doing very little.

MR SMYTH (Minister for Urban Services) (5.07): Mr Corbell can make those sorts of assertions any time he wants, but he cannot decry what this Government has done over the last five years in terms of protecting the environment. It is well known round Australia and it is well known within the ACT that this Government has made significant steps forward in the way that it protects the environment. Mr Speaker, it is quite clear that Ms Tucker has the numbers on this Bill. We can spend a whole lot of time calling for votes and following the example of the Labor Party yesterday - I assume that they will do it tomorrow - and filibuster or we can allow the Assembly to get on with its business in a reasonable way.

Something that you do not often get from the Labor Party is reasonableness about things. We could oppose the Bill, yes. We could get everybody down here. Nevertheless, they would win the vote. I have concerns that the legislation as put forward by Ms Tucker does not achieve what she wants. The Assembly has said clearly that it would like this Bill to go ahead and it behoves us all to make sure that the legislation we pass in this place is as good as we can make it. Ms Tucker got some advice over lunch. I have advice from my officials that there are flaws in this legislation. If it is the will of the Assembly to pass

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