UPPER SOUTH EAST DRYLAND SALINITY AND FLOOD MANAGEMENT (POSTPONEMENT OF EXPIRY) AMENDMENT BILL
29/11/2012
The Hon. K.L. VINCENT (16:24): I also want to briefly put my opposition to the second reading of this bill on the record. Firstly, I would like to say thanks to Holly Hershman from minister Caica’s office and departmental staff for briefing my staff and myself on this bill, and for their general accessibility on other legislative matters in the environment and water portfolios.
However, the timelines we are being given to pass this bill do not really show due respect to parliamentary process and the role of the Legislative Council. Having a bill appear on our Notice Paper for the first time today and then hoping it will be dealt with before dinner for the sitting year is less than ideal, to say the least.
The Hon. J.M.A. Lensink: And not even on the priority list!
The Hon. K.L. VINCENT: Indeed; the Hon. Ms Lensink interjects, ‘Not even on the priority list,’ and that is certainly an important point to raise also. I appreciate that the minister Caica has shown a more engaging and less cavalier approach than some of his colleagues might have with their ‘urgent’ legislation—and I should point out to Hansard that ‘urgent’ should be noted in quotation marks.
The Hon. T.A. Franks interjecting:
The Hon. K.L. VINCENT: You know how I feel about grammar, Ms Franks; apart from cats, punk music and Pokémon, it is the most important thing in my world—of course, apart from politics also. The fact remains that ministers need to sort out amongst themselves what the priorities are and ensure they reach this chamber in time to allow for cross-benchers (and everyone else, I would argue) to give bills due diligence and consideration, otherwise we cannot discharge our duties as members.
Whilst I appreciate that the content of this bill is rather straightforward and simple, the politics of South-East water management could not be categorised as such. My office has been told this morning that the local community does not feel adequately consulted on this matter, and some of the more draconian aspects of the legislation continued by this amendment mean that the department, rather than the local drainage board, maintains more control than landholders and local stakeholders would like.
If we today allow this legislation to pass, then some of these bad practices can continue. I would prefer that the minister and his department go back to the drawing board and that more comprehensive consultation and engagement with landholders, stakeholders and the local community be undertaken. For these reasons, I feel I must oppose the bill today.
