Page 3602 - Week 11 - Thursday, 22 September 2005

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

---

public trees are protected from activities by persons other that the government under both the Nature Conservation Act 1980 and the Trespass on Public Land Act 1932. It is for these reasons that the government does not support this amendment. It would place a considerable administrative burden upon the management of our public trees for no actual or stated benefit beyond what is already provided for in the protection of trees.

MRS DUNNE (Ginninderra) (5.28): Sadly, as I had feared, the government has shown the complete hypocrisy of its approach to this issue. The reason that the Minister for the Environment gives is that it would be an unnecessary burden on urban services. What about the average landholder in the ACT? If it is good enough for urban services, it is good enough for the average landholder. That is the whole fault with this legislation and that is why the Liberal Party has declared that it will repeal this part of the legislation that deals with regulated trees. It is because of the hypocrisy of this government. The government is not prepared to be treated in the same way as it wants to treat its constituents.

Question put:

That Mrs Dunne’s amendment be agreed to.

The Assembly voted—

Question so resolved in the negative.

Amendment negatived.

Clause 10, as reconsidered, agreed to.

Question put:

That this bill, as amended, be agreed to.

The Assembly voted—

Question so resolved in the affirmative.

Bill, as amended, agreed to.

---

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