Page 5078 - Week 12 - Tuesday, 26 October 2010
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
Emergency Services) (5.46), in reply: I thank members for their support of this bill. Can I address a couple of issues first off the bat before I move to some of the substance of the government’s proposed amendments that have been foreshadowed. First of all, in relation to the issue of amendments, it is, indeed, the prerogative of individual members as to when they make their amendments available to others, and that will continue to be the case. We all understand how this place works, and we all understand what risks we take if we do not provide adequate notice to certain members. That is a matter for the Assembly to determine.
But I have to say that the Liberal Party should not stand in their glasshouse throwing stones on this matter. The Liberal Party are renowned for providing amendments late. They are renowned in this place for failing to communicate what their business will be day to day. So I think it is a bit rich for Mrs Dunne to come in here and sanctimoniously complain about lack of notice in relation to amendments. It was always the intention of the government that the detail stage was not going to be dealt with today. In fact, it was in some doubt as to whether we would get to this bill at all today. I indicated to Mrs Dunne that if we did get to the bill today, it would only be in principle, for the very reason to ensure that all members did have the opportunity. But in any event—
Mrs Dunne: After I raised the matter with you. Let’s put the whole picture.
MR CORBELL: We will talk about putting the whole picture in a moment, Mrs Dunne. In any event, the issue of when a party circulates amendments is a matter for that party. In any event, the Liberal Party should reflect on their own practice and procedure about giving advance notice of business to other members in this place before they start throwing stones.
I would also draw the Assembly’s attention to the issue of the letter from the ORS that Mrs Dunne tabled today. Regrettably, Mrs Dunne did not table the full letter; she only chose to table that page that she felt suited her purposes. The full letter included further advice to licensees that there would be further information, fact sheets and guidance material regularly uploaded to the ORS website, and it encouraged licensees to visit the website regularly to keep informed about further developments as the Assembly considered other pieces of legislation. So it is unfortunate that Mrs Dunne sought to only table one part of the letter and not all of it. I would have thought that, in the interests of the fullness and openness that she just lectured me about, she would have adopted the same approach.
I think the ORS are doing a good job in regard to the issue of advice to licensees. It is simply not practical, and I do not think it would be in the interests of smart use of resources or, indeed, the costs of sending out information, to send a full copy of the full fee structure in a paper form to every licensee in the territory. That is an onerous mailing task. Instead, the decision was taken to direct licensees to the relevant information, which is being regularly updated on the ORS website.
I am confident that the licensees have the wit and the knowledge and the understanding of their particular businesses to look at that information and to assess what it means for them. But for those licensees who do want a paper version, the ORS
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video