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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 1 Hansard (20 February) . . Page.. 201 ..

MS McRAE (continuing):

I am looking forward to this inquiry because it will yield us much more detailed information than I have managed to gather on what the practices are in other parliaments. We are well aware that New Zealand, for instance, has an extensive process of public consultation through its committee system rather than through its Ministers. With a thorough inquiry this year, maybe this will be something that the new Assembly may look at seriously next year.

I believe that this would add considerably to the quality of our legislation. If we know, for instance, who has been talked to and what they think about it, it means that we are more likely to consider some of the legislation with more confidence. When you first read a lot of things you think, "Oh, how could they possibly do that?". When it is with the acquiescence and perhaps encouragement of a particular group, it takes on a different flavour. I do think this would be something of great benefit to the Assembly. I am particularly pleased that we have ended up with an inquiry, because it will mean that with thorough care one can look at all the possible options and the serious implications. Quite clearly, this type of work will not come without a cost and without a requirement for extra work from the public servants involved in government legislation. I thank the Assembly for their anticipated support and commend the motion to the Assembly.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Debate resumed from 26 June 1996, on motion by Mr Moore:

That the report be noted.

MR HUMPHRIES (Attorney-General and Minister for the Environment, Land and Planning) (11.44): Mr Speaker, in addressing the issues raised by the standing committee, I want to table two documents. The first one is the second and final report of the Watson Scientific Expert Advisory Group, which was established in April 1996 to advise the Government on the environmental and health issues associated with significant levels of arsenic in residential land in the ACT. The expert group recommended a number of detailed and extensive studies, which included testing to determine the bio-availability and toxicity of the naturally occurring substances at the site and a further investigation of the levels and extent of other heavy metals present at the site. The expert group also recommended that the Government carry out a full risk assessment to determine environmental and health risks arising from soil contamination by metals in the Watson study area. These studies were successfully completed late in 1996.

The expert group concluded, based on the extensive available information, including concentration, bio-availability, toxicity, the acceptable daily intake for metals, and urine and blood testing, that there is no evidence that the sheep dip site and the gossan underlying the Watson investigation area has posed, or poses, a public health risk.

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