Page 4577 - Week 11 - Tuesday, 18 October 2011

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

that is, Parkwood Eggs. It was the Greens, through motions in this place, that proposed the closing down of the Murray-Darling Basin. As Mr Rattenbury said: “The science is in. The science is good. We just have to implement it.” And we know that in fact the science was bad and if we implemented it we would close down much of the basin.

It was the Greens and Greenpeace who destroyed crops recently, in contravention of the rule of law and with support of the Greens, particularly the Speaker in this place. They went out and destroyed crops. Would they have done it to William Farrer 120 years ago? I hope not. And it is the Greens who are always there wistfully saying, “We really like organic waste and it is a great shame that this government is never going to do anything about it.”

At the last election the Greens had a choice. They could go with a party that provided them with their aspirations in a whole range of areas because our policies were so similar. One of them was the one in relation to green waste, which Ms Le Couteur unwittingly extolled today when she extolled the HotRot program that was run by the Australian National University. The Canberra Liberals’ election policy at the last election was based principally on the application of the HotRot system across the ACT. You could have had your green bins and they could have been operating and they could have been producing compost right now, but the Greens made the choice to go with their Labor mates and they have been rewarded for it.

MADAM ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ms Le Couteur): It appears the discussion has concluded.

Terrorism (Extraordinary Temporary Powers) Amendment Bill 2011

Debate resumed from 30 June 2011, on motion by Mr Corbell:

That this bill be agreed to in principle.

MRS DUNNE (Ginninderra) (5.04): The Canberra Liberals will support this bill which in the main extends the operation of the current act for five years to 2016. I am aware that Mr Rattenbury intends to propose some amendments to exclude preventative detention orders as a tool to be used in counter-terrorism strategies. After consideration, the Canberra Liberals will not be supporting those amendments, and I will be speaking about that during the detail stage.

The act which the bill amends was passed by the Assembly in 2006 as part of a national response to terrorist attacks in the United States and elsewhere in 2001 and 2002. Only a few weeks ago, we observed the 10th anniversary of those vicious and cowardly attacks. The bill also recognises the special risks that face Canberra as the seat of the national government and the host to a diplomatic community.

In addition to extending the period of operation of the act, this bill makes a number of other amendments. Firstly, it calls for a statutory review of its operation to be undertaken after 19 November 2014, and the minister will be required to report to the Assembly by 19 November 2015. Most other jurisdictions are doing similarly.

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