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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1996 Week 4 Hansard (17 April) . . Page.. 1018 ..

MS TUCKER (continuing):

This should also include the wider community, because the ninth dot point talks about "developing a culture of service". This would be more possible if there were dialogue with the people being served; that is, the community, or "consumers", as they are being called these days.

Another point that we would like to see added is developing a culture of integration of principles of environmentally sustainable development, including the precautionary principle. Too often, the presumption is that environmental protection is a cost. We have to break through this deadlock where business and environmental interests, or business and social interests, are pitted against each other. If the Government were more forward thinking, it would realise that environmental protection should not be a cost to business; it is often a benefit, and it is certainly a long-term benefit for the society and the ecological systems as a whole. But, as long as we have reports telling us that it is a cost, this archaic culture will continue, and the ACT and Australia will continue to drag behind the rest of the world.

Recommendation 31 recommends that the guidelines for the preparation of business impact assessments be the subject of consultation with peak business groups. Once again I ask: Why only consultation with business groups? The Greens would want to see consultation with a broader range of interests.

It is interesting to see Mr De Domenico adopting all the recommendations with such great relish. I was happy to meet with the task force myself and to provide some input. I do think that there are valid points made in this report and there is some important work to be done; but the flavour of the report concerns me. I support Mr Wood's concerns on that level. Also, one has to wonder a bit about how many little bureaucratic empires are being set up within this report. It certainly is something that you have to ask yourself about at the end of it. A business regulation review unit and various processes are being put in place. The very strong focus on putting business first is a concern. We would wish to see as much enthusiasm being put into an assessment of the long-term impacts on the environment and on the community of our present economic activity.

MR DE DOMENICO (Minister for Urban Services and Minister for Regulatory Reform) (3.37), in reply: I thank members for their comments. Mr Speaker, as members are aware, the Government has a strong commitment to regulatory reform - a commitment that it has demonstrated by the range of initiatives it has introduced since taking up government. The establishment of the Red Tape Task Force exercise was a high-priority, and perhaps a high-profile, commitment on the part of the Government, and the implementation of its recommendations is being treated in a similar manner.

Mr Speaker, when I provided the Government's response to the report of the Red Tape Task Force, I advised that, with the exception of those recommendations relating to changes to the land and planning system in the ACT and one other recommendation, all of the task force's recommendations had been agreed to either fully or in principle. The recommendations relating to the land and planning system were considered concurrently with the findings of the Stein and Mant/Collins inquiries. The Government's response to the Stein report and the Mant/Collins report was presented by my colleague Mr Humphries at the last sitting.

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