Page 1222 - Week 05 - Thursday, 4 June 2020
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
MR PARTON (Brindabella) (11.46): This bill is about tidying up administrative and definitional provisions for nine items of legislation, including administrative and ministerial powers in relation to various bodies of law. We all know it is essential for our government to be vigilant and diligent in maintaining effective legislation for the benefit of the community and so I understand the need to make sure our legislation is current and operating effectively. But I have to say that sometimes—and in this instance—I wonder why the government has left it until the very last months of this Assembly’s term to start cleaning up its statutes, particularly ones that are so necessary for the cost-effective running of the territory.
I can appreciate the need for adjustments to reflect experience gained from our recent series of crises. That is a legislative imperative and we have all come together and accepted that. But many of the amendments presented in this bill seem to be of the sort that could have had some housekeeping done on them quite some time ago.
I would presume, for argument’s sake, the need for a revised definition of a “beekeeper” to confine the occupation to European honey bees as being relevant and needed some time ago and, likewise, approving a code of practice for fertiliser labelling. I also would have thought the need for the construction occupations registrar to certify that gas safety inspectors have the right training and competencies would have been essential ever since we started using gas, but that is just me. Further examples are delegating the technical regulator’s functions under the Utilities (Technical Regulation) Act 2014 and defining the meaning of a waste facility and so on. You cannot help but feel that these important amendments have been ignored and neglected for far too long.
I am pleased they are here, but I wonder just how much the delay in rectifying these has cost the Canberra taxpayer, has frustrated or bogged down our public service directorates and has annoyed the hell out of the average Canberran because of the confusion and ambiguities that these amendments now aim to fix. Once again, I say it is disappointing that many of these amendments have taken so long to be brought to the chamber but, given the practical and operational nature of the changes, this side of the chamber will not be opposing them.
MS LE COUTEUR (Murrumbidgee) (11.48): The bill, as my colleague noted, is minor and technical in nature. The Greens will be supporting the bill. As I have said before about many of these dull but worthy bills, the Greens are always happy to support legislative changes that assist the public service in their work and provide better service to the people of Canberra, as long as these changes are consistent with our environmental, social and economic values. We have read the bill and maybe did not get quite as much amusement out of it as Mr Parton has, but we believe it is consistent with those values and we are happy to support it.
MR GENTLEMAN (Brindabella—Manager of Government Business, Minister for Advanced Technology and Space Industries, Minister for the Environment and Heritage, Minister for Planning and Land Management, Minister for Police and Emergency Services and Minister for Urban Renewal) (11.49), in reply: I thank everybody for their contributions to the debate on this bill. I note Mr Parton’s
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video