Page 900 - Week 06 - Tuesday, 25 July 1989
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
I note that the association I have referred to requests the sighting of any proposed regulations covering pesticide use before they are implemented. The Minister is not in the chamber tonight, nor is her substitute, but I request him or her - perhaps he or she is listening - to make an undertaking to provide that consultation with that organisation and any other relevant organisations before those regulations are put in place.
I want to make a few brief comments in the time left to me about some aspects and details of the legislation. As I have said, I will be moving amendments later. Clause 7 of the Bill provides for the appointment of a registrar of pesticides. Members would note in looking at that, that there are no qualifications attaching to the position of registrar of pesticides. That is a somewhat surprising omission, I would have thought. The Minister appoints that person and that person may indeed have to from time to time make some very technical evaluations. Clause 28(3)(b) of the legislation, for example, refers to the assessment by the registrar of "whether the research could effectively be carried out without dealing with a specified pesticide".
Clause 7 requires that a public servant must fill the position of registrar of pesticides. I would hardly imagine that a person who is merely a public servant - with respect to public servants - would be able to form judgments of that kind. It may be that there will have to be some reference to people with qualifications to make those decisions. I do not understand why, if that is the case, persons of such qualifications could not themselves be appointed as registrar of pesticides.
Clause 14 is a matter of concern. Members will note, in clause 14(i), that it is an offence not to notify when a person discovers that a detail on the register is not accurate in a material respect. There is a penalty of $1,000 for failure to do so. I will make comment on that particular provision later, by comparison with the police powers Bill which was discussed earlier tonight. Yet, later, in subclause (ii), the notice that a person is compelled to provide, it says "or must be accompanied by the determined fee".
So there is a penalty for not complying with a requirement that you notify the registrar of changes or inaccuracies in the specification of pesticides but, when you do so, you have to pay a fee. I hardly think that providing for penalties if people comply with legislation is a terribly good idea. I note, Mr Speaker, that clauses 64 and 65, which provide for the appointment of inspectors and analysts, again have no technical requirement. Anybody at all could be appointed. I could be appointed; the Minister could be appointed; and neither of us has any qualifications for performing those roles. That is a matter of some concern.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .