Page 4727 - Week 13 - Tuesday, 31 October 2017
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
they are standing on the side of big business not taking responsibility for their contribution, for example, to pollution, to litter, to the waste that is generated. It is a highly accepted principle across the world; so I am very surprised that they have not sought further advice.
Mr Wall mentioned that he did not believe there were enough safeguards. I believe that there are enough safeguards. That is a conversation that we could have had with the Canberra Liberals if they had alternatives. Instead, the opposition has again said no under the leadership of Alistair No. They are opposing the scheme. They do not really have the decency, in fact, to suggest amendments or suggest some practical and substantive measures to improve the scheme, if that is their view. Instead, they are opposing it outright.
They are opposing the introduction of a container deposit scheme. I am aware of one operator whose containers would not be eligible. I have actually written to the New South Wales minister responsible for their scheme seeking to have their scheme amended so these particular containers can become eligible. If the opposition had sought to further this conversation, I could have informed them of that.
Question put:
That this bill be agreed to in principle.
The Assembly voted—
Ayes 12 |
Noes 9 | ||
Ms Berry |
Ms Le Couteur |
Mr Coe |
Mr Milligan |
Ms Burch |
Ms Orr |
Mr Hanson |
Mr Parton |
Ms Cheyne |
Mr Pettersson |
Mrs Jones |
Mr Wall |
Ms Cody |
Mr Ramsay |
Mrs Kikkert | |
Ms Fitzharris |
Mr Rattenbury |
Ms Lawder | |
Mr Gentleman |
Ms Stephen-Smith |
Ms Lee |
Question resolved in the affirmative.
Bill agreed to in principle.
Leave granted to dispense with the detail stage.
Bill agreed to.
Tree Protection Amendment Bill 2017
Debate resumed from 24 August 2017, on motion by Ms Fitzharris:
That this bill be agreed to in principle.
MS LEE (Kurrajong) (5.18): This bill has two major purposes: first, to increase the ability of the conservator to deregister a tree which has died of natural causes; and,
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video