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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2000 Week 1 Hansard (16 February) . . Page.. 191 ..

MR SMYTH (continuing):

belonging to the ACT Government and, where we have arrangements, forests belonging to the New South Wales Government and private owners within the region.

The second point of Ms Tucker's motion states:

I suggest that Ms Tucker get in contact with the local mill. At great expense, it has put in some very valuable timber-processing equipment - and created more jobs - so that we can use the timber that we produce here more effectively and get a better return on it. That is already happening in the ACT.

The ACT Government supports the 2020 vision to triple the area of plantations in Australia. The ACT will work with its neighbours on environmental and other issues of concern. They ask us and we tell them. We work together on many issues. For instance, there is the willow strategy for the Murrumbidgee. We are now encouraging other jurisdictions along the length and breadth of the Murrumbidgee. The upper Murrumbidgee catchment group is taking on board things that we have said to make sure that we get conditions for the river right.

It is worth saying again that Environment ACT does have a part in this. Ms Tucker says that we do not, but we do have a part in this. Before you come to the RFA, you have to do a comprehensive regional assessment. We have a part in that. We provide data on the flora and fauna, so that that can be accurate and comprehensive. We have a relationship with other New South Wales government agencies and businesses, where appropriate, to make sure that we have input. We will continue to work with state and local governments to contribute to environmental forums, where appropriate.

It is not appropriate for us to pressure New South Wales on an issue like this one. The process is quite clear. Local Labor is disavowing itself of something that local Labor was in control of when it was decided in 1992 and that Federal Labor put in place. As has been said by so many people, it is appropriate that New South Wales deal with this matter.

MS TUCKER (3.45), in reply: I was hoping for something better from the Minister for the environment than contradictory statements. He seemed to be surprised that we would be confused about the Government's position in terms of its understanding of regional issues and the concept of seeing things as a region. The Chief Minister's response was to accuse me of wasting taxpayers' money by even raising the matter in this place. Brendan Smyth has now said, apparently, that it is not appropriate to raise it in this place, although Environment ACT did have a role in it, and that I need to understand that there is a regional focus to it. I am just saying that the focus is very confused.

Mrs Carnell also contradicted herself in her speech. One minute she said, "How dare Ms Tucker raise this matter in this place?". The next minute she said, "Anyway, I talked about it at the regional leaders forum and they said that it is going to cost jobs". What is the position of the ACT Government? Do they feel that they have an opportunity for

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