Page 3532 - Week 11 - Thursday, 14 October 1993
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Mr Humphries: A Liberal government?
MR CONNOLLY: Under a Liberal government. That board is much lauded by the proponents of corporatisation, because it was the first water board to be corporatised. The Hunter Water Board has done very well, and so has ACTEW. This demonstrates that it is not the corporatisation or the form of ownership that matters. Whether it is a statutory authority or a corporatised body, it is the people who run it and the enthusiasm for reform and change that matter. This ideological hang-up that corporatisation somehow means that things will inherently be more efficient can be demonstrated to be unjustified in that we can show that, of the two water authorities with the best performance in reducing costs, one is corporatised and one is not. You can achieve reform in public enterprises without corporatising. Totalcare was corporatised because it is not a natural monopoly; it competes with the private sector, and it is doing very well.
Question resolved in the affirmative.
BUSHFIRE (AMENDMENT) BILL 1993
Debate resumed from 16 September 1993, on motion by Mr Connolly:
That this Bill be agreed to in principle.
MR DE DOMENICO (5.17): Madam Speaker, the Liberal Party will not be opposing this legislation. The Bushfire (Amendment) Bill 1993 makes changes in a number of areas. It changes the name of the Act from the Careless Use of Fire Act to the Bushfire Act; it enables certain fires to be lit under conditions during fire bans; and it changes sexist language. The name change is simple and self-explanatory. The proposal enabling fires to be lit under conditions during fire bans will bring the ACT into line with New South Wales regarding fire bans and the conditions which apply during a fire ban. It will mean that certain businesses do not have to halt during a total fire ban if carrying out their activities in an approved manner.
The changes made in this Bill were initiated, I am told, by Mr Kaine, when he was Chief Minister, with the former New South Wales Premier, Mr Greiner, in January 1990. The Bill covers prescribed periods and total fire bans, and is part of seven amendments which were identified in the discussions with New South Wales to bring the ACT into line with New South Wales. This amendment is time sensitive. It needs to be introduced before the next bushfire season to be effective. The bushfire season starts in the ACT on 1 November - the only inconsistency with New South Wales, which starts its bushfire season on 1 October. This is quite obviously because New South Wales covers a larger range of country than the ACT, where because of our smaller size and reduced types of country the fire risk is more homogeneous.
The ACT legislation is old - 1956, I am told - and in obvious need of modification. There is one warning, though. The legislation allows changes to the regulations. Although we have been assured that all the regulations will do is bring the ACT into line with New South Wales, careful consideration should be
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .