Page 422 - Week 02 - Tuesday, 19 February 2019
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
based on ACT legislation. We have recently been discussing the fact that the ACT government is paying entities to buy back their poker machine licences. That in itself is the sort of thing that would go towards justifying such a ban, were the Assembly moved to implement one.
I believe Minister Ramsay may also have concerns about the Greens’ consideration that non-party candidates should have a higher cap for expenditure than party candidates. In its response to Unions NSW v NSW 2019, in which the High Court found that caps on third-party campaigners were not constitutional, the New South Wales government did not change the differential expenditure caps on party and independent candidates. I assume they considered the constitutionality or otherwise of this. In terms of moving my amendments, I think that is a reasonable basis on which we can proceed. In summary, I would say evidence based, please, everybody. Climate change is number one, two, three and four.
MR GENTLEMAN (Brindabella—Minister for the Environment and Heritage, Minister for Planning and Land Management, Minister for Police and Emergency Services and Minister assisting the Chief Minister on Advanced Technology and Space Industries) (3.58): I thank Ms Cody for bringing this matter of public importance before the chamber. Her contribution again demonstrates that there is no better friend of workers in this place. I want to focus my remarks primarily on the need for us to be guided by evidence. Evidence-based policymaking is particularly important, and it is not just about having a go or giving it a try, as we have heard from Mr Hanson in this place many times.
Mr Hanson interjecting—
MR GENTLEMAN: He is interjecting again with the same comments. Members cannot simply ignore the self-government act, as Mr Wall attempted to do last year. Constitutional principles are important. And human rights are critical too. You cannot be for freedom of association of members of industry associations but trash the rights of workers. But, sadly, that is exactly what those opposite do day after day in this place.
But I want to return to evidence-based laws. Respecting evidence-based laws means accepting expert advice, and that is what this government does. We do not take the approach of Mrs Jones, the shadow minister for reckless endangerment, whose approach is to undertake prescribed burns—
MADAM DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! You refer to members in this place by their title, their names. Joke names are not acceptable. I ask you to withdraw your reference to Mrs Jones as the minister for reckless endangerment.
MR GENTLEMAN: I will withdraw my comments regarding Mrs Jones, whose approach is to undertake prescribed burns regardless of weather and climatic conditions or to tell police how they should do their job and whom to arrest.
Time after time in this place those opposite have ignored expert advice and proceeded on the basis that they know best. Ignoring expert advice is the only way that those
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video