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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 06 Hansard (Wednesday, 23 June 2004) . . Page.. 2547 ..

lead targets and there is almost no money in this budget to start to implement that strategy. I would be prepared to listen if this government were actually doing something, committing the money and going the hard yards and then saying, “Sorry, we can’t achieve it.” But because the government is doing nothing and showing no interest in this regard, I am not prepared to support the amendment.

MS DUNDAS (5.54): Mr Deputy Speaker, we will be opposing the government’s amendment. The main argument put forward by the Minister for Environment is that we do not understand the cost of this motion, which is why we need to support the amendment. I ask in return of the Minister for Environment: do you understand the cost of not supporting this motion? Do you understand the cost of doing nothing in relation to greenhouse gas emissions and the long-term impact that that will have on the ACT, on Australia and on the world?

The Kyoto protocol is in place because the world has agreed that something needs to be done in relation to greenhouse gas emissions. By backing away from that, the ACT government shows that it does do not care about the long-term environmental impacts of what is being done in the territory.

Mr Stanhope: I take a point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker. The government has not backed away from any target. During a number of speeches tonight, the government—

MR DEPUTY SPEAKER: There is no substance to the point of order, Chief Minister.

Mr Stanhope: There is. A statement has just been made that is patently untrue.

MR DEPUTY SPEAKER: Chief Minister, that is not a point of order. It may be a debating point.

Mr Stanhope: The statement is untrue and it has been repeated on a number of occasions by a number of speakers. The government has not backed away from any targets.

MR DEPUTY SPEAKER: Sit down, Chief Minister.

MS DUNDAS: Mr Deputy Speaker, this assertion cannot be just about the dollar-based bottom line. There is a need to look at the long-term economic and social impacts as well. I thought the government was willing to move forward on this front, with the Office of Sustainability being established and the tabling of supplementary budget paper No 5 in relation to triple bottom line reporting, but it appears that it is just using lots of words and not taking a lot of action. If the greenhouse strategy is printed and ready to go, as the Minister for Environment has indicated, why can’t we have a copy to prove what the Chief Minister has just interjected about?

Mr Stanhope: Are you calling me a liar?

MR DEPUTY SPEAKER: Be quiet, Chief Minister. Ms Dundas has the floor.

MS DUNDAS: I wasn’t actually, Jon. I was just looking for some backup.

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