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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 12 Hansard (13 November) . . Page.. 4178 ..

MR OSBORNE (8.30): Mr Speaker, I will be very brief. I support the Bill and the proposed amendments. I think the progress of this Bill is a demonstration of how the Assembly committee system can be used to great effect. For those who clearly have not been listening in this place, I have been saying that the system could be improved, not that it does not work. On that point, Mr Speaker, my criticism is mainly about the operation of the Executive, but I will get to that at a later date.

When this Bill was proposed I had some serious concerns about it. I believed it needed a lot of work before it passed into law. I said at the time that I thought the Bill was too vague in parts. It left industries' environmental obligations unclear and exposed employees to unreasonable levels of liability. I raised this issue with Mr Moore because I felt that this piece of legislation was one of the most important that this Assembly has faced in the short lifespan that we have had here. Mr Moore agreed and, rather than have a public debate on it, it was self-referred by Mr Moore - - -

Mr Moore: And the committee.

MR OSBORNE: It was self-referred by Mr Moore and the Planning and Environment Committee to the committee. Although the committee did not entirely agree with some of the issues I raised, at least it considered them in detail, and I thank it for that. I propose to support all of the committee's recommendations. Although I do not fully agree with them all, the committee has done a lot of work and is best placed to advise on the Bill. It has been a very sensible process on what could have been a very divisive issue. There has been compromise on all sides, I believe, and I want to show my support for that by supporting all of the amendments.

MS HORODNY (8.33): Mr Speaker, businesses in the ACT do have concerns about this legislation. They are concerned that this legislation will somehow impede their business activity; that it will make life difficult for them and more costly for them. I believe, Mr Speaker, that there is no need for industry to fear this legislation. Industry can actually benefit from strong environment regulations. Such regulations can eliminate dodgy businesses which undercut their competitors by not acting responsibly. They can lead to new business initiatives such as new business opportunities in environmental management technology. They can improve market competitiveness by reducing production costs and fostering innovations. They can also create a better working environment for employees and can reduce the overall pollution costs to the community.

There are many examples around the world of companies which have profited from adopting strong environmental management practices. The 3M company, for example, is a multinational company which has had a pollution prevention program in place since 1975. This company has prevented 750 tonnes of pollutants from entering the atmosphere and has saved $790m over this period. These are their figures and they are very proud of their track record in the 20 years. This type of program can be profitable regardless of the size of the company.

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