Page 4231 - Week 14 - Thursday, 24 October 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Mr Speaker, I think Mr Kaine has already referred to the problem of clause 171 of this legislation. It is a critically important provision which, despite that importance, contains provisions of extreme unspecified powers which I would say will have to be interpreted by a court before anybody can have any clear idea of what they mean. For a clause of such critical importance, it is regrettable that the Government could not be more precise in saying what it meant by paragraphs (d) and (e) of that clause.
I have to say to you that I will expect a very clear indication from the Government of what it intends to achieve with those particular paragraphs because, without it, I have the strongest feeling that considerable difficulties will arise from the operation of that section. Again, the problems to which I have alluded, of citizens being unable to ascertain what exactly is meant by legislation and what exactly they have to do to meet the legislation's requirements, are even more the case.
I have little time left to comment on Mr Moore's environmental council proposal. I do not believe that it satisfies the requirements of simplicity and straightforwardness, which I think are important in this present exercise. I would be interested, though, in seeing what the Labor Party is going to do about this. It supported the proposal when it was put forward by Mr Moore, when it was in opposition. Will that be its position now? One will sit back and watch with interest.
MR COLLAERY (11.07): Mr Speaker, I move:
That so much of standing and temporary orders be suspended as would prevent Mr Collaery from speaking to a motion to adjourn the debate on this Bill.
This set of planning packages has as its basis the notion that there is a Territory Plan which, in the introduction to the document which we received, as Michael Moore quite correctly observed this morning, states that it is a legal document which defines land use policy and development control criteria for all land within the ACT, apart from land which is designated under the National Capital Plan. It is an absurdity for us to be forced to debate this issue in principle this morning, based on a document that none of us has had the opportunity to scrutinise properly or even read in its entirety.
Mr Speaker, clause 7 of the Land (Planning and Environment) Bill, of which this Government now seeks in-principle endorsement from us, says quite clearly:
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .