Page 4802 - Week 16 - Monday, 25 November 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
MR WOOD: Well, it did not ever happen, Mr Jensen. We propose to see that the deemed disallowance provisions do apply - that is, if a draft variation comes to the Assembly, under the six-day rule it has to be debated or it fails, it is disallowed; in contrast with the provision at the moment whereby, if it is not debated in those six days, notwithstanding any objection to it, it is simply passed. So, we have taken a step, Mr Jensen and Mr Collaery, that you were not able to take. That is one of these proposals in your Bill that we will accept. The others, I believe, impose unworkable restrictions to normal processes.
MR KAINE (Leader of the Opposition) (2.40): The Liberals, in opposition, have some concern at the timing of the bringing forward of these amendments. After all, we have on the table the major Bill on which the debate has already begun. The very same amendments that Mr Jensen purports to include in this Interim Planning (Amendment) Bill (No. 2) are those that he intends to incorporate in the longer-term planning Bill.
There are a couple of considerations about that. One is that, to some degree today, we are anticipating the debate on the major Bill if we accept or reject or deal in any way with the amendments that Mr Jensen is proposing, as I have said, simultaneously with that Bill having been placed on the table and the debate having really begun.
The other thing is that the sorts of amendments that Mr Jensen is proposing appear to me to be ineffective in that, even if we agree today to the Interim Planning (Amendment) Bill, this Assembly goes into recess in two weeks' time. Under normal circumstances it will not meet again until the new Assembly is convened, after the next election, which is quite likely to be late April, or some time next year, by which time the new planning Bill will already be in place.
Particularly, with reference to the amendment that Mr Jensen has put forward that requires the involvement of Assembly committees in the process, there will be no Assembly committee in place or meeting at any time between now and the convening of the new Assembly when it could take on the responsibilities that Mr Jensen envisages. So, I have to wonder why it is that at this stage in the life of this Assembly, and given that the new planning Bill is on the table, Mr Jensen seeks to amend the Interim Planning Act, because this Bill can have little, if any, effect. So, I have some questions about that.
However, looking at the substance of the Bill, in many ways Mr Wood could have written my speech for me.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .