Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .
Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 12 Hansard (12 November) . . Page.. 3980 ..
Debate resumed from 5 November 1997, on motion by Ms Tucker:
That this Bill be agreed to in principle.
MR KAINE (Minister for Urban Services) (10.41): Mr Speaker, this legislation is of considerable interest to the Government. I think that we have already begun the move towards the kinds of things that are envisaged by the Greens in the Bill that we have before us. I have some words of caution, however, based simply on the fact that the methodology for conducting performance audits of the kind envisaged here is not really yet in place. There is a good deal of work still to be done, so I think we need to be aware that there is a timescale in connection with legislation of this kind. It may not move as quickly as the Greens would like, simply because there is as yet no established methodology for doing some of the things that are inherent in the legislation.
The Government, of course, is committed to the principles of ecologically sustainable development, and that is what the legislation is based on; but I suggest that we need to exercise a little bit of caution in adopting such legislation without understanding the constraints that are likely to be found, and that may not be easily done. Only in September of this year, the Government tabled a status paper on environmental accounting. The Government is still waiting for input in connection with that discussion paper. Apart from their consideration of this legislation, I would urge members to take the opportunity to make their inputs to the Government in connection with the matters raised in that status paper. There is much to be addressed. To proceed through the consultation process in response to that status paper on environmental accounting is something that I can only urge members of the Assembly to adopt.
MR BERRY (Leader of the Opposition) (10.44): As the premier environment party in the Assembly, the Labor Party will be supporting this Bill. The Bill does make sense to move ahead. It will impose some new arrangements on the Auditor-General to consider matters which in the past have not been taken into account. In many ways, it will be a new world for the Auditor-General. It has been argued that the Commissioner for the Environment may have dealt with this. That alternative might have been considered in the context of this debate, but the Bill is an approach that we will support and indeed follow closely to see how it develops in the context of the Auditor-General's continuing work. His job is a very important one. It is about making sure that the bureaucracy and the Government perform in accordance with acceptable standards. This new approach will be a new guideline for the Auditor-General to cope with. We trust that it works in favour of the environment but, most importantly, works in favour of the community. If it is not in the better interests of the community, then it will not be accepted. We will be supporting these amendments.
MR MOORE (10.46): Mr Speaker, in rising to support the Auditor-General (Amendment) Bill 1997 in principle, I think it is appropriate to congratulate Ms Tucker for bringing this Bill forward and for not letting it go at a time when it looked like it was going to go down. The Bill expands the role of the Auditor-General in a very positive way. No longer will the Auditor-General look at just economic indicators. He will now look at environmental indicators as well. I had some difficulty with the way the legislation
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .