Page 5693 - Week 17 - Thursday, 5 December 1991

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .

---

not agree that it should be allowed to disallow the surrender of a lease that the Government has determined. It seems to me to be quite unnecessary.

Consideration interrupted.

ADJOURNMENT

MR SPEAKER: Order! It being 4.30 pm, I propose the question:

That the Assembly do now adjourn.

Mr Wood: I require the question to be put forthwith without debate.

Question resolved in the negative.

LAND (ENVIRONMENT AND PLANNING) BILL 1991
Detail Stage

Consideration resumed.

MR WOOD (Minister for Education and the Arts and Minister for the Environment, Land and Planning) (4.31): The Government opposes this amendment. It simply is not practical. You would have either a schedule a mile long, or the broadest possible provisions written into it. It just will not work.

MR JENSEN (4.32): I just cannot understand this. I am not proposing a schedule, Mr Wood; I am proposing a provision for the specification of criteria and for an instrument made under the proposed subclause to be a disallowable instrument. One minute you are happy for there to be disallowable instruments; the next you are not. I am not proposing that the lease be disallowed. I think that is what Mr Kaine said. All we are saying is that the criteria for the surrender of a lease, in these circumstances, should be a disallowable instrument. What is wrong with that? It provides clear guidance to both the Government and the community as to the criteria under which the Executive is required to accept the surrender of a lease. The mind boggles. I just cannot understand why the Government would not want to do it.

Amendment negatived.

Clause agreed to.

Clauses 213 to 218, by leave, taken together, and agreed to.

---

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .