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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1996 Week 8 Hansard (27 June) . . Page.. 2380 ..

Mr Stefaniak: That is true.

MR MOORE: That is true. Mr Speaker, we know what it feels like. Pushing this Bill through now before it goes to a committee makes it more difficult for members who are on the committee because it basically sets positions in concrete. It makes it much harder for members on that committee to move to change their positions, to modify their positions. One of the great strengths of our Assembly committees is that people have been prepared to move positions to try to understand the genuine policy issues associated with whatever the reference has been. That has been recognised as a great strength of the committees, and was even in those "House of farce" days.

I understand the Greens' perspective on this. On the one hand, they wish to assist small businesses. They have said very clearly that the Government's legislation does not go far enough - as far as they are concerned, it does not go far enough; we know that - but it is better to take some and continue along the way. That is their perspective. When they announced their policy, they made that very clear. I understand that. At least there is a genuine attempt to say, "Yes, we are prepared to wear the flak in order to protect small businesses. We are prepared to do that trade-off". Then they have taken that extra little step that says, "We will even go halfway with the Libs because that is what we can get now, and then we will continue to try to get the rest". I think that is a fair description of their position, and I can understand that. Now that the matter has been referred to a committee, is there really a rush - I am addressing this particularly to the Greens - to get to the halfway position now, or can it wait two or three months? You may want to set a timeframe for the committee. So far the Planning and Environment Committee has met all its timeframes. We had difficulty with the report we tabled today, but we did meet the timeframe. You should consider how important it is to get this legislation through today and to make this change so that within the next three or four days - couple of weeks or however long it is going to take - we can have changed shopping hours.

Ms Tucker: Six.

MR MOORE: I hear somebody say six weeks, but in fact it could easily be gazetted within a couple of weeks. In fact if the Minister were determined, it could be gazetted within 24 hours. We have to ask the question: What is the rush? We have agreed to the reference to a committee. I have said - and I know the other members of the committee would agree - that we will do a genuine inquiry. No matter what happens, we will do our very best to do a genuine inquiry, even if we have to do it as an afterthought and check back about what has been done. We will do our very best.

But what is the rush? If you really want to protect small business, let us do it properly. Let us consider all the issues. Let us adjourn this debate now, as Mr Berry says, and let us consider this issue properly over the next couple of months. If we adjourn debate now, I would be happy to report back to the Assembly on this issue on the first day of its very next sitting, if indeed you thought it was necessary to push it very hard. I think it would be better to do an effective inquiry, which I guess would take about four months. That would be the sort of time we would expect. I think Mr Berry makes an important point in suggesting that we do adjourn now, and I ask the Greens to consider very carefully what the rush is for.

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