Page 2930 - Week 10 - Tuesday, 13 August 2013
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
perhaps even the government—that are supportive of this approach. However, it seems that the government do not have any real intention to make this a reality. In his response to this debate, the minister responsible might clearly articulate what the government’s view is on a single nature conservation agency and what the time line is, if they are indeed committed to making that a reality.
One of the other things that we discussed in the estimates committee was an issue about calculating emissions, and we actually had quite a detailed discussion. I am grateful to the officials and to the minister for their cooperation in trying to give us the information we were looking for. But one thing that was crystal clear was that the calculating of emissions is not crystal clear. There are so many vagaries, there are so many assumptions, there are so many variables that I think we need to be very careful when we make policy decisions based on quantifying emissions. It is a very risky approach and whilst I am not saying that they are inaccurate, it would be a stretch to say that they are accurate. Therefore, we do have to approach any such calculations with extreme caution.
An interesting note which is visible on page 249 of budget paper 4 is the proposed estimated employment level for 2013-14. The directorate will see a cutting of 29 full-time equivalent staff. If you look at note 3, it says that the decrease of 29 FTE in the 2013-14 budget and the 2012-13 estimated outcome is due to savings initiatives. Where was that in the election campaign, that actually there would be an efficiency dividend within the ACT government, such that they would be cutting staff?
If you listened to the TV ads, either paid for by the Labor Party or by one of their very closely associated entities, you would have thought that the cuts would be from the other side of the chamber. But no, there in ESDD they are cutting 29 staff. But it is all right because it is by natural attrition. That is usually what is proposed and is usually what the Labor Party cry foul at. So I think it is somewhat hypocritical for the government to be proposing natural attrition for an efficiency dividend which cuts staff when they, of course, had mock outrage during the election campaign just nine or so months ago.
Turning to ACTPLA, which is of course a bit of a boiling cauldron within the ESD Directorate, there are so many issues in ACTPLA. I think the main issue is the fact that the territory plan has become so complex, so difficult to read, so incomprehensible, the pendulum has swung way too much in favour of the government that pretty much it is now at a point whereby if the government wants to do you in, it can. The government has got all the power in the world to stop a development or to issue some kind of violation.
It is interesting that one of the officials during the estimates discussion said, at estimates page 714:
With respect to everybody on any given job, particularly as the jobs become more complex, you can always find a fault if you need to. The seriousness of the fault is what you are looking for.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video