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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 14 Hansard (9 December) . . Page.. 4771 ..

MS HORODNY (continuing):

I have already covered the recommendations in the Stein report in what I said earlier; so I will not go into that. But Ms McRae was incorrect in what she said about the Stein recommendations in relation to this issue, because Stein very much recommended:

"any person" should be entitled to approach the AAT or Supreme Court to civilly enforce breaches of the Land Act without being required to establish common law standing.

I was pleased to hear Ms McRae say that her party is willing to look at this issue in the next Assembly, but I am very disappointed that we cannot actually deal with open standing here and now, once and for all. I do not understand why the Labor and Liberal parties have such a fear of open standing. Is it because they believe that the letter of the law currently is not being adhered to? This is about the issue of accountability and I do not understand why there is such a reluctance to allow members of the public to call on the Government to adhere to the letter of the law.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Bill agreed to in principle.

Bill, by leave, taken as a whole

MR HUMPHRIES (Attorney-General and Minister for the Environment, Land and Planning) (5.11): Mr Speaker, I seek leave to move together the three amendments which have been circulated in my name.

Leave granted.

MR HUMPHRIES: I move:

Page 1, line 12, insert the following new clauses in Part II:

"Interpretation

3A. Section 222 of the Principal Act is amended -

(a) by omitting `175(3)(b)' from subparagraph (e)(i) of the definition of `development' in subsection (1) and substituting `175(3)(a)'; and

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