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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2003 Week 10 Hansard (24 September) . . Page.. 3582 ..

MS GALLAGHER (continuing):

retail premises from operating in built-up areas on a year-round basis, particularly in Fyshwick. I think this is probably one of the strongest measures that we can put in place in order to stop potential illegal sales, but also to prevent opportunistic buyers purchasing fireworks outside the time when they are allowed to.

It would have been useful, I have to say, to have an explanatory statement to this bill. It took me some time to go through the current Dangerous Goods Act and what Mr Pratt's bill proposes to see where he is proposing changes, and what those changes are actually trying to achieve. I want to make that point.

The government has taken the view that the Dangerous Goods Act, as it is now, is completely out of date. It is not just out of date on fireworks; it is out of date on the whole issue of the storage and use of dangerous goods and hazardous substances. We also have to look at introducing legislation about some of the national agreements that have been put in place, for example, the ban on asbestos and the use of asbestos.

We have indicated that we will be introducing legislation in October which will be a complete redraft of the Dangerous Goods Act. I note that Mr Pratt commented, when he introduced the bill, that his bill was a redraft of the Dangerous Goods Act. I have to say that it is probably a redraft of a certain part of the Dangerous Goods Act. It certainly put in a new section and there are some new definitions and regulations.

However, it is not the sort of redraft that this government will be putting in place when we look at the bill that we will be introducing. It will be called the Dangerous Substances Act, and it will integrate the regulation of dangerous goods and hazardous substances. The proposed legislation will address the current inadequate regulation of hazardous substances in the territory. It will reform the licensing of explosives, including fireworks, and other prescribed dangerous substances, and will implement a notification system for high risk quantities of dangerous substances.

It will also establish a centralised register for monitoring the location and quantities of dangerous substances and explosives, and it will contain regulations to implement the national ban on the manufacture and use of asbestos, consistent with national agreements. It will also make several changes in relation to fireworks, some which I have alluded to. It will make changes to what consumer fireworks are, the use of them on the Queen's Birthday weekend and the retail arrangements for fireworks and, significantly, it also makes changes to the public display arrangements, something which Mr Pratt's bill again does not address.

If you are looking at some of the issues implicit in the problems that occurred on the long weekend, certainly I have had representations that indicate that the public displays also create conflict for communities, that they frighten dogs and that people are unaware that they are going to be held. Certainly, the legislation that we are looking at introducing will address some of those problems by specifying the times that fireworks can be used, stipulating the public notification that has to be given and the letterboxing that has to be done around communities to let them know, if these events get permits, when they are on and that they are being done at a time that is more acceptable to the community.

I guess Mr Pratt's bill just maintains the Dangerous Goods Act, but simply bans access to fireworks for members of the public. It fails to address the fundamental problems

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