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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 9 Hansard (3 September) . . Page.. 2801 ..

MR CORBELL: Unlike the Minister, I am not here to speak on behalf of the owners of Parkwood. It is up to the owners of Parkwood to make comments in the public arena as to what their view is on this issue, but we have had discussions with Parkwood. The whole point of the Labor Party's approach on this issue is that we have spoken to all the parties affected. (Extension of time granted) We believe that the owners of Parkwood understand our approach, understand why we have taken this approach and accept the reasons why we have taken this approach.

Labor's amendments support the intentions of the Greens' Bill, while providing security to the existing method of egg production in the ACT and therefore to jobs. The ban will not take effect until agreement is obtained at ministerial council level, and then not for a period of six years. Labor's approach is a sensible solution, working within the constraints set by national agreement. I urge the Assembly to support the amendments circulated by the Labor Party.

MR HIRD (11.37): I have missed something here somewhere. Here we have Mr Berry, the new Leader of the Labor Opposition, taking another new direction. The amendments that Mr Corbell has foreshadowed, as well as the Bill itself, will drive a business out of the ACT. Right at this time the building industry is going through a difficult time. Mr Berry has identified that. Parkwood are about to embark on a major upgrade of their existing facilities. If they have to make a commercial decision on that on the basis that this Bill will go through and therefore within a certain time they will be required to move lock, stock and barrel out of the ACT, will Mr Bartter and his directors decide to stay and spend that money in the ACT now? I say no. Basically, the amendments to be moved are having a bob each way.

There is one important question I would like to raise in this debate. Where is the support in the general community for the Greens' obsession with the so-called vagaries of the production of cage eggs and the way they are hell-bent on destroying the jobs of 50-plus Canberrans? Under this Bill those jobs will go. You can go on with the rhetoric and say that they will not go, but if the place closes down the jobs will go.

Mr Humphries: And it is in your electorate, too.

MR HIRD: It is in my electorate and yours, too, Mr Berry.

Ms Horodny: You have sacked more people than that from the Public Service.

MR HIRD: Listen and you will learn something, girlie. After talking with senior management at Parkwood Eggs, including Mr Bartter himself, I am convinced that this is a problem which will resolve itself. If consumers want change, then they will get it. The big question is whether Canberra families are prepared to pay an extra $1.20 a dozen for their eggs. Can you tell the difference between a free-range egg and a barn egg? You cannot, I submit. The Greens would realise that if they accepted reality. What will happen is that Canberrans initially will go to Queanbeyan to get cheaper eggs.

Ms Horodny: And spend $5 on petrol?

MR HIRD: They would go across the border to get their eggs.

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