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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 05 Hansard (Thursday, 13 May 2004) . . Page.. 1880 ..

provisions. It is an issue that, as legislators, we should be increasingly cautious about. Ms Tucker essentially makes the point that, over time, there has been the gradual increase in the sorts of penalties that attract strict liability penalties and we need to be very vigilant indeed.

I think that the approach suggested by Ms Dundas is about as good as we can get in the circumstances. On the basis of that and because we need to keep sending a message, Mr Speaker, that this is an area of concern, an area where we must be cautious, and we must go forward gingerly, the Liberal opposition will be supporting Ms Dundas’s amendments, because they do send a message.

Amendments agreed to.

MS TUCKER (9.30): I move amendment No 1 circulated in my name [see schedule 2 at page 1913].

I spoke to these amendments at the in-principle stage of the debate, but I will repeat those arguments here for members. This first amendment is about plans of management. Section 60I would establish lawful clearing as:

(a) clearing of native vegetation in accordance with a licence … ; or

(b) in accordance with a plan of management under the Land (Planning and Environment Act) 1991, division 5.7 (Public land; or

(c) in accordance with an approval for a development under the [same] Act; or

(d) in accordance with a fuel management plan under the Bushfire Act 1936, part 6 …; or

(e) if it is necessary and appropriate to avoid an imminent risk of—

(i) serious harm to a person; or

(ii) substantial damage to property; or

(iii) serious or material harm to the reserved area.

These exemptions mean that not every instance of proposed clearings will be subject to assessment against the specific goals of the nature conservation plan.

My amendment 1 is to omit the licence exemption for work in accordance with plans of management. Plans of management are prepared for all public land in the ACT. While there will be some detailed consideration in the plans, they will not look at specific sites of proposed activities in the same level of detail as should be used when making a licence assessment. For this reason, I think it is reasonable and prudent in a nature reserve to require a specific licence, which means this specific assessment will be carried out by the Conservator of Flora and Fauna in accordance with the objects of the reserve. I think that that is the least we can ask when we are looking after our nature reserves.

MR STANHOPE (Chief Minister, Attorney-General, Minister for Environment and Minister for Community Affairs) (9.32): Mr Speaker, the government will support this particular amendment. As Ms Tucker has explained, omission of this paragraph would mean that a person carrying out work in a nature reserve pursuant to the plan of management would need to get specific approval from the conservator in the form of a licence.

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