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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1996 Week 2 Hansard (28 February) . . Page.. 384 ..

MS HORODNY (continuing):

At the moment decisions relating to the use of these poisons in our environment are made purely within a chemical framework. Non-toxic alternatives are not considered. The only choices that people who make these decisions have is basically about which chemical to use. A number of alternatives to various chemicals that we use are available. One of them is actually being demonstrated tomorrow. That is the Waipuna hot steam method. It is extremely effective. It is used throughout New Zealand, and has been, I understand, for a number of years. It is also used by the Leichhardt Council in Sydney and on the north coast quite extensively, I believe. It is a hot steam method of eradicating herbaceous weeds. It is completely non-toxic and obviously does not have the problems of residue build-up in our environment.

There are currently very few avenues for the community to have input into the way chemicals are used in the ACT. We are all familiar with the pink dyes that appear around the pavements, roadways and park areas in the ACT. The sighting of that pink dye is usually the first any of us know that spraying has been going on. Indeed, we never really know what has been sprayed, how much, and for how long people and animals need to keep away from the area that has been sprayed. There are comprehensive guidelines regarding where and when these poisons can be used in the ACT.

Aside from the environmental and health reasons for such an inquiry, there are also some important principles of community right to know. That is why public notification is one of the issues that the inquiry would consider. Access to information on the use of chemicals is critical for the whole community. It is particularly important to those people in the community who are more sensitive to some of these nasty chemicals than other people are. There is no doubt that different people in the community have different tolerance levels. That all needs to be investigated.

The Greens are fully aware that there will not always be non-toxic alternatives; but at the moment we do not have the mechanisms, and indeed, we do not have the political will, to do more with the alternatives that have been developed. I mentioned Waipuna as one alternative. Another alternative that is already extensively used in other parts of the world is the three-in-one Supergrow. That is also something that this inquiry will investigate.

During early January, while I was away, Ms Tucker met with researchers in the CSIRO entomology unit. They were certainly very keen to have input into such an inquiry. The Commissioner for the Environment, Joe Baker, has agreed to undertake this inquiry. There is the question of resources for this inquiry. I would hope that this Government would consider this to be an important enough issue to allocate resources to allow this inquiry to be as comprehensive and as wide ranging as it needs to be.

I would remind the Minister for Planning, Mr Humphries, who is also the Minister for the Environment, that the resources allocated to the Stein inquiry were quite substantial. That inquiry was given half a million dollars. Not too many questions were asked about that. It was considered an important thing to clear up. I certainly agree with that, and I would not quibble with that figure. You can, I guess, argue also that that inquiry will bring financial returns in the form of the betterment that was part of the investigation.

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