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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 12 Hansard (13 November) . . Page.. 4176 ..

MR CORBELL (continuing):

Mr Speaker, in the course of the debate over the past couple of months during the development of this Bill to the stage we are at tonight, Labor has focused on a number of key concerns, and I would like to highlight some of these now. First, and perhaps most importantly, is the opportunity for public participation in and debate on the processes undertaken by the proposed Environment Management Authority in the development of codes of practice, environmental authorisations and environmental protection agreements. We were very concerned to see that there will be open processes for public consultation and public access to information on the range of undertakings that will be overseen by the EMA. We wanted to see that, Mr Speaker, because these processes provide for important mechanisms which protect the environment and which allow, in some cases, the pollution or exploitation of our environment within particular limits. The community deserves, indeed, the community has a right to expect, to be able to comment, to make suggestions and to participate in the development of these mechanisms because these mechanisms in some instances are defences under the Act. It is very important, therefore, that people have the opportunity to comment.

Labor has also been concerned to see that the EMA is effectively independent and able to undertake its tasks without undue hindrance from political sources or from individuals who may attempt to thwart the regulations and laws which the EMA is there to uphold. This perhaps was one of the key issues in the debate over the environment protection legislation. Labor shared concerns by the Greens in relation to the independence of an Environment Management Authority. We were presented with argument from the Government that the Territory really is too small to sustain an independent separate statutory organisation outside a government department.

The alternative approach argued to us by organisations such as the Conservation Council was that, just because we are a small Territory, it does not mean that we could not have a small organisation separate from other government departments and other government administration. Labor was prepared to accept the Government's argument on the issue of a statutory office within the department, but only if certain provisions were written into the Bill that ensured that if a Minister were to direct the Environment Management Authority in some way we knew what was going on and that there were opportunities for public scrutiny of a Minister's direction.

I am pleased that the Government has responded to that comment and again has been prepared to amend its Bill to allow for scrutiny of processes and public notification and notification in the Assembly of decisions made by Ministers to direct the authority in particular circumstances. I believe that that is very important. That is why we were prepared to accept the Government's argument that the Environment Management Authority could sit within the structure of a government department. If we find that that mechanism does not provide the independence and effectiveness of operation that we believe the Environment Management Authority should have, we will be prepared to look at the Act again and look at opportunities to provide for an independent Environment Management Authority. If it has to be outside the structure of government departments, we would support that if it is warranted. It is very much up to the government, regardless of its persuasion, to ensure that the EMA operates in a truly independent manner.

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