Page 1579 - Week 05 - Thursday, 18 April 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
stage could not go along with the suggestions made by the other two members in relation to that. I think the Aboriginal community really needs to be fully consulted in relation to that particular issue.
Another area where we made additional comments relates to clause 187. That is the clause dealing with the environment which permits the environment Minister to exempt proposals from the environmental assessment process. We see no reason not to support that ministerial discretion. Ministerial discretion is, in fact, a fundamental tenet of parliamentary democracy. Accordingly, we thought that the legislation should not be altered and that that clause should remain. If a Minister exercised his discretion inappropriately, or if a Minister were to totally disregard an environmental assessment, with all the provisions in this Bill, he really would be going out on a limb and he would have to have pretty good reasons. If he acted inappropriately, maybe his Cabinet colleagues would have a say and, if not, the electorate would have a say in relation to that government. However, I think there are legitimate occasions when clause 187 is necessary, and we could see no reason why that right should be taken away from a Minister of the Crown.
In conclusion, I would like to talk a little bit more about the complexity of the legislation. Whilst there were some heartening comments from the Melbourne firm of solicitors who stated that the legislation was comprehensive, fair and effective, the Law Society of the ACT - - - (Quorum formed) The Law Society of the ACT was concerned about the legislation still being very complex. (Extension of time granted)
The Law Society made a number of very valid recommendations in relation to how to improve this legislation further and simplify it, and those comments are endorsed by the Liberal members. Finally, overall, we believe that the officials have done a good job in getting this package into one Bill. It will need further refinement; it does need to be balanced. I would expect that there will indeed be further amendments from time to time; but, overall, it is not a bad Bill.
MR MOORE (5.00): Mr Speaker, my strong recommendation to anybody who is looking at this report is to read thoroughly the minutes and the dissenting report in conjunction with the report. I think that is a most critical and most important factor. I thank my colleague Mr Berry for giving me the opportunity to speak at this juncture.
Mr Speaker, the committees failed to deliver on the task that they were set, as far as I am concerned. That was the reason I chose to write a dissenting report. It is very important not to point the finger at the committees themselves for this failure. Certainly, it is absolutely critical not to point the finger at the secretariat because the committees were set an impossible task.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .