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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 05 Hansard (Tuesday, 4 May 2004) . . Page.. 1722 ..

requirement for government agencies to report in their annual reports breaches by that agency of environmental laws and standards.

This will be a very significant enhancement to accountability measures, providing that governments, government departments and instrumentalities are answerable for their behaviour and their actions. I think we would all agree that it will provide a very major additional motivation for government agencies, government instrumentalities and statutory authorities to ensure that they do comply with the law and that they do the right thing. Some other matters are also dealt with by the bill and the extent and detail of these is set out in the explanatory statement.

Members will also recall the remarks I made at the time that the bill was presented that the government proposes to develop a memorandum of understanding with New South Wales which is designed to prevent future incidents like the Transgrid matter and to deal with any such incidents should they arise in the future. A similar approach will be taken within the ACT government to ensure that there is an adequate response to breaches of environmental laws by ACT government entities.

It is very important that we do continue to seek, to the extent that we can, collaborative arrangements with New South Wales, acknowledging the fact that the Transgrid line does run through the ACT. It is essentially a continuum of the line that serves much of the region as well as the ACT and issues in relation to that are issues that we do need to deal with on a regional basis.

The government has also proposed some amendments to the bill and these amendments essentially fall within two categories. The first two items and the first two proposed amendments adjust the power of the court to order that an offender make amends for damage they cause to native vegetation on land and nature reserves. It will be appropriate in some cases for the person that causes that damage to meet the government’s cost of doing the restoration work rather than that they do the work themselves.

That would be particularly appropriate in sensitive areas or areas designated as wilderness where there would be an ongoing need to monitor the progress of the rehabilitation over time and where the ecosystem is particularly sensitive that it is being earmarked by the community as worthy of that additional and particularly sensitive care and management. We have such an area in the Namadgi National Park now in the Bimberi wilderness and I think it is particularly important that we ensure that we do not do anything to compromise the management and integrity of that particular wilderness area. That particular amendment will require a change to insert new sections 60K and 60T. I am aware that members have touched on those proposed amendments in their speeches at this in principle stage and I think there is quite broad acceptance that those amendments are appropriate and they will be supported generally by members.

I understand from the comments that have been made by all members of the Assembly that there is essentially broad agreement to the proposed bill until we get to the part of the government’s further amendments, which were designed, essentially, as members have pointed out, to deal with the government’s responses to certain actions that have been taken within the community which have frustrated the government’s attempts to build the Gungahlin Drive extension.

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