Page 3306 - Week 09 - Wednesday, 19 August 2009
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
a critical element of our approach as we recognise that the best policy outcomes are produced without increased cost to the taxpayer.
Unfortunately yet again, the Labor Party will be dragged kicking and screaming to the table and we have heard every excuse under the sun. It is no doubt a source of considerable embarrassment to the minister for climate change, Minister Corbell. There is obviously another difference of opinion on this issue. As I said earlier, we look forward to the environment minister speaking to us about his views on this bill and perhaps bringing to light some of the differences of opinion.
In relation to the Labor Party, the Labor Party policy, quoted in the media this week, was to encourage the phasing out of electric hot-water systems. They agree with the principle but it appears that they will not agree to it in principle. Primarily from Mr Barr, I think it is about the fact that it is not his idea. We happen to believe that, if there is a good idea on the table, we will support it. We do not agree with all aspects and that is why we will move amendments later in the day and seek to make this bill fairer and better. If the government, through the planning minister, actually has any sensible amendments—
Mr Corbell: Have you circulated your amendments?
MR SESELJA: We have made clear our policy approach. We have not had the same from the planning minister in the lead-up. We said we would honour our election policy and that was for new dwellings.
Mr Corbell: Where are your amendments? Put your amendments on the table.
MR SESELJA: Our amendments will reflect that. There will be no substitution.
MADAM ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Mrs Dunne): Be quiet, Mr Corbell.
MR SESELJA: That is what they will reflect and we have been very clear on that. We have had nothing from the minister. He has raised concerns about the start-up date. If he wants to come to us with a sensible suggestion for a later start-up date, we will look at it but we have not even heard from the planning minister’s office in relation to what their approach will be, what their rationale will be, what their concerns will be. He has simply come out and had a spray here in the Assembly, without having actually engaged in the dialogue.
It is poor policy development from this minister when we see a complete unwillingness to engage in any reasonable dialogue. It will eventually lead to poor outcomes if we see this complete lack of dialogue from this minister. This minister has easily the worst record in this new Assembly in relation to reasonable dialogue between offices and members of the Assembly. It will be unhelpful in the development of policy and it is unfortunate that we are able to get more information out of the Greens than we are out of the planning minister, who has access to a department, who can produce a lot of the information that will help us make informed judgements.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .