DEVELOPMENT (REGULATED TREES) AMENDMENT BILL

Committee Stage

In committee.

(Continued from 18 October 2007. Page 1008.)

New clause 3A.

The Hon. SANDRA KANCK: Before I move my amendment, I would like to ask the minister a question about where we go on this bill. As he interjected, this bill was last dealt with in October last year, and it was the government's choice not to proceed. However, groups such as the Conservation Council are keen to meet with the minister in an attempt to come up with a compromised version of this bill. Other groups, such as aboriculturists and some members of local government, were concerned about this bill, but many of them who saw some value in some parts of the bill would like that opportunity. So, I ask the minister whether he would be willing to meet with these groups to talk about the drafting of a better bill, one that really provides protection to these trees.

The Hon. P. HOLLOWAY: I have discussed it with those groups, and I am always happy to do so. Mr Chairman, given that the opposition has decided that it wants to run this parliament, we are in its hands as to what we discuss. It is up to you.

The Hon. D.W. RIDGWAY: In October, when this bill was last debated, as the opposition spokesperson on this matter I indicated that we did not support the government's bill in its current form and that, if the minister wanted to progress it, the bill could progress through this chamber and be dealt with by members in the other house; and, if not, that he might like to go away and consider a less cumbersome and more workable solution. Has the minister taken the time to try to consider a more workable solution? I notice that he tabled regulations in relation to significant trees. Is he now using the regulations as the method in which to deal with this matter? I suggested that was a more sensible way in which to do it.

The Hon. P. HOLLOWAY: I have dealt with a particular issue in relation to Mount Barker—and I am pleased to have done so. A much better way in which to progress the issue in relation to trees would have been to pass the bill. I appreciate that I did not have the numbers—

The Hon. D.W. Ridgway interjecting:

The Hon. P. HOLLOWAY: Members opposite said they would defeat it. The fact is that, as we just saw in the division and as we saw in the divisions last Wednesday and Thursday, members opposite are playing games with the WorkCover bill. They do not want to deal with it, even though in the last six months of 2007 the WorkCover liability went up by more than $2 million a month.

The Hon. R.I. LUCAS: I have a point of order. Mr Chairman, will you please indicate to me which clause in the trees legislation refers to the WorkCover liability? If there is no clause, will you rule the Leader of the Government out of order?

The Hon. P. HOLLOWAY: Mr President, he is quite right: I am out of order. I am pleased that a precedent has been set and I expect it to be followed when we move to the next piece of legislation.

Progress reported; committee to sit again.