Page 2481 - Week 08 - Wednesday, 13 August 2014
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
I am quite happy to accept the Chief Minister’s amendment to this motion, because I think the work continues. I am confident that what is happening on the ground is that staff across the board are continuing to seek the best outcomes for the environment, as is the cabinet. We may not always agree on how to get there. As there are in this place, there are debates around the best possible pathways. But I do not doubt that we will follow through on this matter and we will—
Opposition members interjecting—
MR ASSISTANT SPEAKER: Members! There are far too many interjections. The member is entitled to be heard without interruption.
MR RATTENBURY: The cabinet will continue to seek the best outcomes for the environment. It is clear that there are overlaps between, in particular, TAMS and what is now EPD. It still is not absolutely clear which sections and branches should go exactly where in which agencies. They are the matters that are being worked on, and the directors-general are involved in those conversations. As the Chief Minister has indicated, when those matters are resolved, she will report back to the Assembly. On that basis I will be supporting Ms Gallagher’s amendment today.
MS LAWDER (Brindabella) (3.49): I will speak to the amendment and close. I, too, am pleased to hear the general tripartisan support for the concept of a single nature conservation agency expressed again today. I guess I should not be surprised that the Chief Minister has attempted to give me a little slap down, because that helps to deflect from the issue—and the issue in question is why it has not taken place to date.
The Chief Minister also mentioned that she was surprised to hear that this was the number one environmental issue for the Canberra Liberals, and that is a fair comment. But whilst I may be the newest member of this Assembly, Mr Assistant Speaker, it is my understanding that the role of representatives in the ACT Legislative Assembly is exactly that—to be a representative. I probably would not have even thought to bring this issue to the Assembly if it were not for representations made by stakeholders in the nature conservation area.
I think it is symptomatic of a complacent, tired, old government that they stop listening to their constituents and their stakeholders in this area and think that they know best. It would be a better approach to listen to those in the sector, take on board their comments and work to implement what may be best for the environment as a whole.
There is not much more I can say other than that we will be opposing the amendment. I commend the motion as it stands. It is something we and stakeholders in the environmental sector believe is in the best interests of our environment.
Question put:
That the amendment be agreed to.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video