Page 3393 - Week 11 - Tuesday, 20 September 2005

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

those. But I look forward to the debate on those individual amendments as we get to the detail stage.

At this stage I thank members for their contribution. I think it is a matter of enormous regret that the opposition will not support this bill. It sends a signal that they are not interested in protecting the essential nature of Canberra; they are not interested in protecting significant trees; they have walked away from the importance of this legislation; they do not believe it is important or that there is value in protecting significant trees; and they are not interested in protecting the overall urban landscape, a vital part of the appearance of Canberra, namely, the fact that we are the bush capital and that urban forest is a very significant part of the amenity of the place. It is a real pity that members of the Liberal Party have not found it in themselves to support this very important and vital legislation—legislation that I know the vast majority of Canberrans support absolutely.

Question put:

That this bill be agreed to in principle.

The Assembly voted—

Ayes 9

Noes 6

Mr Berry

Ms MacDonald

Mrs Burke

Mr Stefaniak

Mr Corbell

Ms Porter

Mrs Dunne

Dr Foskey

Mr Quinlan

Mr Mulcahy

Mr Gentleman

Mr Stanhope

Mr Pratt

Mr Hargreaves

Mr Seselja

Question so resolved in the affirmative.

Bill agreed to in principle.

Detail stage

Clauses 1 and 2, by leave, taken together and agreed to.

Clause 3.

DR FOSKEY (Molonglo) (5.07): I move amendment No 1 circulated in my name [see schedule 2 at page 3416].

This amendment proposes to amend clause 3 (1) (a) of the bill, which deals with objects of the act, to omit “exceptional” and substitute “significant”. The clause, which now reads “to protect individual trees in the urban area that have exceptional qualities” would read “to protect individual trees in the urban area that have significant qualities”.

Essentially, this amendment broadens the scope of the legislation and I propose it for two reasons. First of all, the word “exceptional” places a high threshold. There is no existing

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