Page 2402 - Week 06 - Thursday, 10 May 2012
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
We also looked at food. We found that there was a lot of food wasted, for instance, in the ACT. That came out from an Australia Institute report. For instance, we looked at campaigns around these sorts of issues, how you might be able to get education and information out to people around their purchasing decisions. That is not just around food. It can be around a range of goods and services. But we looked at giving them some tips and ideas and things to think about when they are purchasing goods and services, and that includes food.
We looked at the ecological footprint reduction measures and the cost of that. One of the things we know about climate change from many experts around the world, including the Stern report, is that you really need to be looking at the cost of not acting. This applies to the ecological footprint as well. We do need to be tackling these issues and looking at the ways that we can put steps in place. Some of them will be around technology but others will be around the way that we live and how we interact with our environment. As I have said, this does not need to be at the cost of being a prosperous place. It does not have to be at the cost of having a great lifestyle. That very much was also outlined in the report.
I would again like to thank all those involved. It was a very big task. I particularly thank Ms Porter. We did have to have many meetings there at the end to go through what is a significant number of pages and information. I would again like to thank particularly the secretary who was finishing off the end of the inquiry, Sam Salvaneschi.
It has been quite a journey getting through this document but I do hope that it will be picked up, that not only the ACT but also those surrounding town councils will take the opportunity to read through the report. I do hope that we will get some movement on this very important issue. Obviously, we will be looking forward to the government’s response that we should be getting back within the next three months. Again, I would commend this report to the Assembly.
MR SMYTH (Brindabella) (4.22): Mr Seselja was going to deliver the speech. Unfortunately, he is unable to be here so, with the indulgence of the Assembly, I will deliver it on his behalf.
As I have paid Ms Hunter the courtesy of giving advance knowledge that I will be dissenting from this report, I would like to take this opportunity to make a few comments in relation to the document that has been presented to this Assembly today. Firstly, I would like to thank the committee secretary, Ms Sam Salvaneschi, who did a very good job on this report. I know that members of the committee value her very hard work. We always find her to be very professional in her dealings. I would like to put that on the record today.
The committee report uses an adversarial premise as its conceptual basis of its discussion. It has been made clear throughout this report that economic growth and population growth are antithetical to the environment. Paragraph 3.40 sums this idea up best, when it stated:
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video