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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 12 Hansard (13 November) . . Page.. 4175 ..

MR CORBELL (continuing):

It is also significant, Mr Speaker, that for the first time the legislation regulates and licenses many activities which currently do not have a high level of regulation. An example is codes of practice and other requirements on the building industry. This is a progressive step. It is a step that has been a long time coming, but it is an important step because there are many activities and many processes that occur in the Territory at the moment that do not have the appropriate level of regulation and appropriate scrutiny, and appropriate ability for enforcement where there are breaches. Those things do not exist at the moment. It is very important that those things are in place, and this Bill achieves that.

The Bill also establishes important new concepts on environmental protection which have not been built into the law before. The concept of environmental authorisations, the concept of providing businesses, industries and individuals with licences to pollute, I think, is a very significant step. It is significant because what we are saying in the legislation is that the Territory is prepared to extend a privilege to a business, an organisation or an individual to pollute if the Territory deems that it is for the social wellbeing of the community and, to a degree, the economic wellbeing of the community for that to occur; but only within certain limits and only for very strictly regulated processes. That, I think, is an important step. It has not occurred before and it is important that we formalise that process.

It is important also that people who receive those sorts of licences, those sorts of authorisations, understand that it is indeed a privilege that the community is granting them. It is indeed a courtesy that has been extended to them by the community because the community believes that their activities or actions are worth while, are a social benefit, are an economic benefit, and are an essential service. There is a degree of integration there that we need to understand.

Mr Speaker, the integration of the concept of protecting and maintaining our environment with social and economic needs is clearly another very important aspect of this Bill, and an important aspect which the Labor Party supports. This was a case that was argued quite strongly in the committee's deliberations and the committee's discussions and negotiations with officers of the department and the Minister. We did not want to be in a situation where we were saying we have to trade off one aspect, say an environmental aspect, against an economic aspect. We wanted to see an integration of these concepts. We wanted to achieve an integration of decision-making when it came to assessing economic needs, environmental needs and social needs. I am sure that later in this debate the Minister will be moving some amendments which reflect that very important point in the objects of the Act. Labor supports that change. We believe it is an important change. It is important because we want to make sure that the primacy in this Bill is about protecting our environment, and that change achieves that.

The establishment of the notion of a precautionary approach in environment protection legislation is also a very significant step. To see that integrated in a piece of environment legislation is absolutely crucial. We are pleased to see that that precautionary principle is being built into the environment protection legislation. That is a very important concept which must sit there and which the EMA and the Government overall must take into account.

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