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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2000 Week 1 Hansard (16 February) . . Page.. 196 ..


MS TUCKER (continuing):

discussion that we are having. Even if this Government is not that interested in the broader ecological issues for our country, it should be interested in the economic implications for the ACT.

Question put:

That the amendment (Mr Corbell's ) be agreed to.

A call of the Assembly having commenced -

Mr Humphries: Mr Speaker, we wish to withdraw our opposition to the amendment, so there is no requirement for a division.

MR SPEAKER: Is leave granted to withdraw? There being no objection, leave is granted.

Amendment agreed to.

Question put:

That the motion, as amended, be agreed to.

The Assembly voted -

AYES, 7   	NOES, 8

Mr Corbell	Mr Cornwell
Mr Hargreaves	Mr Hird
Mr Osborne	Mr Humphries
Mr Quinlan	Mr Kaine
Mr Stanhope	Mr Moore
Ms Tucker	Mr Rugendyke
Mr Wood		Mr Smyth
		Mr Stefaniak

Question so resolved in the negative.

ROAD TRANSPORT LEGISLATION AMENDMENT BILL (NO 2) 1999

Debate resumed from 8 December 1999, on motion by Mr Rugendyke:

That this Bill be agreed to in principle.

MR SMYTH

(Minister for Urban Services) (4.06): Mr Speaker, this Bill seeks to put into the legislation that starts on 1 March the amendments that Mr Rugendyke made to the old legislation last year. The new road rules will not come into place until 1 March because of the delay in their consideration by the Assembly, so we have to reinsert these provisions in the new Bill. The situation is as before. The Government has a small


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