Page 3390 - Week 12 - Tuesday, 17 September 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
I had circulated my own amendment to clarify that, but I understand that Mr Jensen had independently come to the same conclusion. The Government is prepared, I can foreshadow, to support Mr Jensen's amendment on that, which will basically make it clear that the Assembly, at the end of the day, has control over this. That really answers Mr Kaine's argument, to the extent that there is an argument from Mr Kaine. What Mr Kaine is saying is that it is a good thing to give a power to what he calls a Territory owned corporation which is a public authority structured in manner X, but a dastardly thing to give the same power to ACTEW, which is a statutory authority constituted in form Y.
It is basically a minor difference in structure. They are still a publicly owned authority, they are still performing a public function, and I cannot see any logic in your distinction between ACTEW and a statutory corporation. To the extent that you are concerned about the Assembly losing a power, I would suggest that the amendment that has been foreshadowed by Mr Jensen answers that because it makes it clear that the Assembly can disallow. I hope that in the detail stage we can come to a speedy resolution of the diverse views that were indicated in the earlier debate.
Question resolved in the affirmative.
Bill agreed to in principle.
Detail Stage
Clause 1 agreed to.
Clause 2 agreed to.
Clause 3
MR MOORE (5.07): I rise, having run a series of debates and negotiations on this matter over the duration of this debate for the last half-hour or so. This ought not be necessary. The situation is that this legislation was tabled last week and brought on for debate four days later. I gave drafting instructions yesterday for my amendments. As I said, parliamentary counsel provided them for me today. The instructions for Mr Jensen's amendments, I understand, were provided earlier today and parliamentary counsel were able to support this parliament once again with a very quick response. It ought not be necessary. This business of bringing legislation on one week and then debating it the following week, unless it is a matter of urgency, is entirely inappropriate.
The main purpose of my amendment was to ensure that the Assembly as a whole could deal with the debate on the water levels. I chose to go about that in one way and Mr Jensen chose to go about it in another way. It is quite clear to
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .