Page 4074 - Week 13 - Thursday, 31 October 2013

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

I wish to reiterate that the protection and management of biodiversity are fundamental to the achievement of a more sustainable future. It is therefore timely to ensure that this bill reflects the range of contemporary management of biodiversity practices while still maintaining traditional protection for species and ecosystems.

Public consultation on the exposure draft of this bill is now open for comment for six weeks. Submissions will be accepted until 13 December 2013. All public comments received by that date will be considered by the government. Copies of the draft bill, explanatory statement and details of consultation arrangements are available from the ACT government’s legislation register website.

I commend the papers to the Assembly.

Standing orders—amendments

MR GENTLEMAN (Brindabella) (10.54): I move:

That standing order 77(e) be amended by:

(1) inserting “or Executive Members’ business” after “Assembly business”; and

(2) adding “provided further that at any time during the consideration of Assembly business any Member may move that Executive Members’ business be called on and the question on such motion shall be put forthwith without amendment or debate.”

This is an administrative motion to allow us to get to executive members’ business. It has been quite clunky in the past. I do not think there is a need for any further discussion. I think most members understand what it is there for.

MR HANSON (Molonglo—Leader of the Opposition) (10.55): We will let this get through today, although I note that without Mr Barr here we could, if we wanted to, prevent it. But I will use the occasion to rise again to talk about executive members’ business.

I note that today we have a situation where the executive members’ business that is to be debated is agreed to by the government, so why one minister is essentially getting his business done in this place instead of in cabinet still eludes me. I would have thought this is something that could have been achieved perhaps by an email or a discussion—or perhaps Mr Rattenbury does not want to talk to Ms Burch and perhaps this is some sort of power play or grandstanding by Mr Rattenbury to his political base. It still eludes me.

What we are seeing here essentially is just a change in process to make it easier for Mr Rattenbury to do his grandstanding to his political base and to perhaps in some regard try to attempt to be the pseudo education minister. I am not quite sure what the purpose of this is today. We will let it go through, but I will not do so without noting that obviously this executive members’ business really, from the Labor Party’s point

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