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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1999 Week 12 Hansard (25 November) . . Page.. 3741 ..

MR CORBELL (continuing):

$230,000, does not appear to be justified in any way. It does not seem to relate to any particular level of demand expected for financing for projects required under LMAs. It would be fair to say that the only way it appears to be justified is that it reflects all the Government is prepared to pay, indeed find, for this important work. Labor sought to amend the Bill, the amendment to the Land Act, to provide for the rent payouts received by the Government to be incorporated into funds available for land management agreements.

However, the constraints of the Australian Capital Territory (Self-Government) Act have meant that only the Government could legislate in such a regard. We urge the Government, therefore, to consider such a step. A number of hypothecated charges already exist in the ACT. Funding such as Labor proposes for implementation of land management agreements should be seen as a cause worthy of such a step.

Labor will also support Ms Tucker's proposal to establish a rural conservation trust. This mechanism would allow rural lessees, the Government and land conservation groups to work together on management and land management agreements and in raising funds for land management agreements and associated projects.

In the detail stage, Labor will move an amendment to provide for the trust to receive donations and other contributions as part of its fund-raising, as well as establishing a land management trust fund. I need to indicate now, however, that Labor will not be supporting Ms Tucker's proposals on public inspection of land management agreements, an increase in penalties for breaches of a land management agreement, or on proposed powers of entry and inspection. On balance these do not, we believe, add to the cooperation and goodwill needed to have these significant changes to rural leases implemented. This is not to say we would not be prepared to reconsider at a later date, should these issues need addressing.

There are a number of other issues I would like to briefly address. The first relates to appeal rights in variations to land management agreements through the Administrative Appeals Tribunal. It has been raised with me by a large number of rural lessees who have concerns that there are no appeal rights for land management in relation to agreements between the Government and the lessee. I am pleased to see that the Government, through the Minister, have circulated amendments which will provide for an appeal to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal on any variation to a land management agreement. This is a positive step and Labor will be supporting it.

The areas of Tenant and Booth relate to another dam for the ACT. This area has been broadly indicated for a long time as the site for a potential new dam to be built to satisfy the Territory's demand for water. The Government proposes to provide 99-year leases for rural leaseholders in the Tenant and Booth areas and to accommodate the demand for a potential new dam through the use of specific withdrawal clauses for the purposes of a dam - to withdraw land from those leaseholders.

Previously, leaseholders in these areas have been on a shorter tenure than many other rural leaseholders in the ACT because of the uncertainty relating to a new dam. On balance we are prepared to support the Government's approach. But I should send

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