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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 6 Hansard (18 June) . . Page.. 1728 ..

MR KAINE (Minister for Urban Services) (11.44): It might be appropriate, since Ms Horodny's amendment is being debated, for me to seek leave to move together my amendments to Ms Horodny's amendment.

Leave granted.

MR KAINE: I move:

(1) Paragraph (2), after the words "outcomes of the trial", insert the words "in the first sitting week in August 1997".

(2) Paragraph (3), insert, before the existing words, the words "if the trial is deemed successful, the interim arrangements may continue during consideration by the Assembly of the report, but".

(3) Paragraph (4), omit the paragraph.

First of all, I would like to commend the Greens. At least they see the merit of conducting a trial. They do not have closed minds, like the Labor Party, and they are prepared to see the trial conducted, which seems to me to be a sensible thing. Their amendment indicates that they have a genuine concern that this might get out of control and could become a permanent thing without the Assembly having the opportunity to make some judgment on that.

My amendments are aimed at enabling that review process the Greens would wish to see. I am amending paragraph (2) of their amendment by inserting the words "in the first sitting week in August 1997". In other words, the report on the trial has to be submitted to the Assembly immediately the trial is concluded, which will give the Assembly the first opportunity to judge whether this is a good thing or a bad thing. The second amendment is to their paragraph (3), in which I have added the words "if the trial is deemed successful, the interim arrangements may continue during consideration by the Assembly of the report". That allows the Assembly to consider the report, but it means that a successful trial can at least continue until the Assembly has made a judgment on whether it should continue permanently or not. Of course, if the trial is deemed unsuccessful, it will be stopped right then and there.

The second part of the review process, which Ms Horodny was worried about, is provided for in her paragraph (3). If we decide to make it permanent, she is asking that we come back to the Assembly with a report on how this would be integrated into the activities flowing from the Graham review. I think that is reasonable. It gives the Assembly two opportunities, if it is to become permanent, to review - one when the trial is complete and the other when we determine that we will make it a permanent arrangement. The Assembly will have an opportunity to review on both occasions and, obviously, if the Assembly judges on either of those occasions that it should not proceed further, then the Government would be bound by that. My amendments are intended to facilitate the arrangements the Greens wish to see in place and to make sure that there is a review by the Assembly of this new arrangement. I think they are eminently sensible, and I understand that at least broadly they are acceptable to the Greens.

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