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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 11 Hansard (4 November) . . Page.. 3524 ..

MS HORODNY (continuing):

activities are not spelt out. I know that there will be work in the future on spelling out in greater detail where different activities should fall and on tightening up some of the numbers and some of the areas of activities.

I believe that a breach of an environment protection agreement should be sufficient justification for an environmental authorisation to be required. To have an agreement rather than an authorisation is already a privilege. It involves an agreement that is based on trust that the business will do the right thing. If that trust is broken, then I believe the agreement has been breached and the business should then be required to get an authorisation.

Another concern I have is noise control. I am not convinced that the changes that the Government is putting forward will improve what currently exists under the Noise Control Act. At present the excessive noise in a particular location is determined relative to the existing background noise levels at that location, and the proposed regulations impose a standard acceptable noise level across a whole zone as defined in the Territory Plan. This means that residential areas in Canberra that are currently very quiet could be subject to much higher noise interference up to the proposed noise zone standard than what is currently allowed. This should be of concern to all residents, and I am sure that the Assembly will have to revisit this issue in the future.

In conclusion, I look forward to the Government response to this report. I will be very interested to see which recommendations and amendments they take on board. This legislation is the start of a change in the community involvement in environmental protection. It is a partnership, a union, between government, business and community to protect our community asset, and that is the natural environment. I imagine that as this legislation is implemented there will be more amendments, and, as we evolve as a society over the coming decades, our rights and responsibilities within the community will change.

This legislation is really just the beginning of implementing such new standards. I must stress that the Government must resource this legislation adequately to make it workable and to allow enforcement. (Extension of time granted) Education is a very important element of this legislation, and resourcing a comprehensive education campaign is vital. I would like to see brochures produced. I would like to see advertising in the print and electronic media that progresses the knowledge and the duty of care and responsibility in the community. I also would like to thank the secretary to this inquiry, Sandy MacDonald, and also Rod Power.

MRS LITTLEWOOD (12.31): Mr Speaker, I rise to speak today not so much as a member of the Government but as one of the members of the committee. I believe that what has occurred with this report really shows balance. In fact, Mr Corbell almost took my speech. The report does indicate what can be achieved with cooperation in this place. Members of the community outside this place may care to look at this as an example. It combines environmental interests, business interests and community responsibility. I think the committee has done that fairly well.

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