STATUTES AMENDMENT (NATIONAL ENERGY RETAIL LAW) BILL

Second Reading

Adjourned debate on second reading.

(Continued from 27 October 2010.)

Mr WILLIAMS (MacKillop—Deputy Leader of the Opposition) (16:44): My comments on this bill simply echo those I have already made to the house. I also point out that the minister has had his agency and a plethora of staff working on this matter for four years, and he is complaining that the opposition has asked for more than seven days. So, the minister has had four years, and then he stands up and abuses the opposition and suggests that we are deliberately doing this because we want to protect some part of the industry and have no feeling for consumers.

I and my colleagues take our position as legislators very seriously, and I reiterate that I am not going to stand here and say that we have thoroughly debated a piece of legislation when we have not had the opportunity to do just that, having had the opportunity to analyse the legislation.

These two pieces of legislation are significant, they are complex and they are very hefty. As I pointed out, the earlier piece has some 320 clauses. The minister talks about the amount of time and the consultative drafts that have been out there. I know full well that nobody in this place gets serious about a piece of legislation until the final draft is there. If you put all the work into the first draft, you are probably wasting your time, because it will be changed and you have to go back and start again. I have plenty of things to do with my time, plenty of important things, without having to retrace my steps over and over again.

So, I reiterate that this is an abuse of the parliamentary process. The minister knows that—he knows it full well. At least I am being honest, because I recall this very same minister when he was in opposition coming in here with legislation and saying things like, 'I'm not going to go through all the bill, it's all been said, and I am not going to do that,' and it was pretty obvious that he had not even read the thing. I would challenge any member of the house, and particularly those on the government side, to stand up and contribute to either of these bills, because I would guarantee that not one of them has read the second reading explanation of either of these bills or, certainly, understood the clauses. But they will all vote for them. I personally think that that is an abuse of the parliamentary process.

The Hon. P.F. CONLON (Elder—Minister for Transport, Minister for Infrastructure, Minister for Energy) (16:48): I would like to answer all of the salient points made by the opposition spokesperson—therefore, I commend the bill to the house.

Bill read a second time and taken through its remaining stages.