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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 05 Hansard (Tuesday, 25 May 2004) . . Page.. 2170 ..

going on in that hall? It’s overcrowded.” It had nothing to do with the support for the groups who are concerned about the environmental implications of this road— environmental, by the way, in the sense that, as I have already said today, it is in legislation in the ACT which takes into account, of course, the social as well as the ecological aspects.

This particular amendment from Mrs Cross, as I said, goes some way to make this a little bit more transparent and the Greens will support it.

MRS DUNNE (12.39): I rise to speak again to this amendment to make the point that in no way did I demonise anybody. I rose and said that there were not very many people involved. There is quite a difference. Ms Tucker has actually been a bit devious there.

MRS CROSS (12.39): Can I just say that it is irrelevant how many people were against it. Everyone has a right to oppose something if they are not happy with it. There do not need to be 10 or 20, 100 or 1,000. In a proper democracy everyone has a right to voice their opposition and concern. I have concerns with Mrs Dunne’s comments as well. In a democracy we all have a voice. At the end of the day we come into this place as legislators, and we express that voice and we vote accordingly. But as far as the groups in the community are concerned, they should not be minimised in their importance just because there are 10 or 20, 100 or 1,000 of them.

MS DUNDAS (12.40): I think Mrs Cross has just made a very good point. Everyone does have the right to express their concern about a development, about planning in the territory, except until now. Under this legislation they won’t have that right to express their concern about the Gungahlin Drive extension.

I am glad to see that the government is supporting this amendment, in terms of seeing the flaws in their own bill, but it does not go far enough. We do not address the issue that the proper place for consideration of these problems in relation to whether a licence or other instrument has been issued legally is a court, not the Assembly; nor do these amendments address the limited information the Assembly will have access to in order to make a judgment about the proper decision-making processes of the government.

These amendments do give a small additional role for the Assembly in oversight of government decisions. That is why we will support these amendments, but they do not fix this bill. They deny rights to every member of the ACT community, no matter where they live; everybody is having their rights curtailed today.

Amendment agreed to.

Clause 9, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 10 and 11, by leave, taken together and agreed to.

Clause 12.

MS TUCKER (12.41): I will be opposing this clause. I am opposing this clause, as I said earlier. It seems extraordinary to me that no action can be taken in court unless the person first gives the minister 14 days notice. While it could be argued that compulsory

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