Page 3143 - Week 07 - Thursday, 1 July 2010
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
We saw just last week in the discussion on the commercial disposal of kangaroo carcasses and hides that one of the things that constrain us from doing that is the wording of the Nature Conservation Act. Simple things that would seem automatic and quite straightforward to the people of the ACT cannot be done because this piece of legislation has been unreviewed for 30 years. It is just far too long.
Under the Stanhope government since 2001 there has been very little done. There has been money appropriated and there has been a lot of talk—but not much else. I think it is time that the minister started to explain what “shortly” meant and to come up with a much more concrete timetable on the finalisation of the review of the Nature Conservation Act.
There is money in the budget for the transfer of responsibility of water regulation from the commonwealth. During the hearings, the minister was unable to answer a lot of questions about the number of users that would be caught up by the new arrangements, which are covered not only by the appropriation in the budget but also by legislation which is before this place.
There was no certainty as to whether current users were being metered and what equipment they would need to install to comply with the ACT legislation which would come into effect when it is passed in this place. The Liberal members in their dissenting comments made the recommendation that by the last sitting day in August 2010 the government table a plan for the implementation of the transfer of all water management responsibilities from the commonwealth to the territory, including the cost of implementation, what equipment will be required to install the number of water users that will require to be licensed, the revenue streams that will flow under the new arrangements for both one-off licence fees and ongoing extraction charges.
I thought these were simple and straightforward questions, but they could not be answered in the hearings, and it is particularly disturbing considering that there is legislation before this place at the moment.
I want to spend a little time on some of the water conservation measures that are the responsibility of the Department of the Environment, Climate Change, Energy and Water, and particularly to look at the stormwater retention artificial wetlands, which are becoming a part of the north Canberra landscape.
I think this is one of those quite laudable projects which seem quite simple in their conception but have a few problems along the way. I recall when the minister first became the minister, very early in the piece, he presided over the opening of the wetland behind the O’Connor shops. I was there for that and I think that has been a great success.
Mr Corbell: No. Brendan Smyth opened that.
MRS DUNNE: I thought you were the minister who opened it, just after you became minister, but not to worry.
Mr Corbell: No.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video