Tuesday, 18 February 2020

Business of the house

Program

Ms ALLAN (Bendigo East—Leader of the House, Minister for Transport Infrastructure) (13:01): I move:

That under standing order 94(2), the orders of the day, government business, relating to the following bills be considered and completed by 5.00 pm on Thursday, 20 February 2020.

Forests Legislation Amendment (Compliance and Enforcement) Bill 2019

Great Ocean Road and Environs Protection Bill 2019

Justice Legislation Miscellaneous Amendments Bill 2019

Owners Corporations and Other Acts Amendment Bill 2019.

In making a few comments on the government business program that is before the house today I also wish to add, as the house would be aware given that we have just first and second read the local government bill regarding the Casey council, that it is the government’s intention—and can I acknowledge this intention has the support, I believe, of all other parties and Independent members of the house—for the Assembly to debate this bill as the first item of government businesses this afternoon following members statements to enable its expeditious passage to the Legislative Council. It is also, I believe, with the willingness of the Council. Of course I am not in a position to speak on behalf of the Legislative Council, but it is certainly the government’s intention that with the support and will of the Legislative Council that bill also pass the Legislative Council today.

There has been much public commentary around this council and the circumstances that have led to this bill coming into the Parliament. I will be judicious in my commentary, given that there are various other judicial procedures underway, and we would encourage members of this place to work carefully through these issues when they debate this bill either in this place or the other place. But it is certainly our intention to see this matter resolved for the Casey community as quickly as possible through the Parliament and to have that resolved today. Again, can I thank all members of the house for their cooperation in bringing this about today.

There are four other bills on the government business program, which makes it a very strong and robust government business program, one that is worthy of support—worthy of resounding and unanimous support. A little birdie has given me a little bit of a whisper in my ear that my hopes and expectations will be dashed when the Manager of Opposition Business gets to his feet, that my ongoing desire for this house to run smoothly with great cooperation from those opposite—the Manager of Opposition Business is going to let me down on this occasion. That is a great disappointment to me because it is a strong government business program. It contains a number of different policy areas. Can I particularly call out the Great Ocean Road and Environs Protection Bill 2019. I believe that might have been an election commitment—

Mr Carbines: Indeed, from both.

Ms ALLAN: From both sides, the well-informed member for Ivanhoe informs me. He has got very good connections in the Great Ocean Road region—very good connections. I look forward to his contribution both on this debate and on the bill as well perhaps later on today.

It is great to see again with the government business program that we are putting to the house this week that it contains the business of government, it contains the passage of bills that are related to our election commitments—so we are delivering on that important agenda that we laid out to the Victorian community in 2018—and it is also dealing with other priority matters, as I have already touched on. I put it to the Manager of Opposition Business that I cannot understand why he would want to oppose such a robust and strong government business program that has such great policy and legislative merit as it does; however, I will leave it to him to explain his actions and his decision to not support the government business program on this occasion.

The Manager of Opposition Business has indicated that the opposition would like to take the Forests Legislation Amendment (Compliance and Enforcement) Bill 2019 into the consideration-in-detail stage, and I have indicated to the Manager of Opposition Business that if there is time available at the end of this week that would be an opportunity; however, given that we have also had to add to our program the bill regarding the Casey council—and, as I have indicated, it appears that it is the unanimous will of the house that this be given priority and precedent for our government business program—that may or may not leave time available at the back end of the week. That, however, is again another reason why this is a great government business program and one worthy of support. I look forward to this motion being approved by the house, and we can go forward with a strong legislative program.

Mr WELLS (Rowville) (13:06): I would like to point out to the Leader of the House the large amount of cooperation that was in place when we had our first week of Parliament back for 2020. I think there was great cooperation between all the parties on that. We are grateful for the way that worked out, because obviously there was a lot of work in regard to the John Cain condolence and the bushfires motion as well. This week, through cooperation once again, the government is very keen to get the Local Government (Casey City Council) Bill 2020 through, and on our side of the house we support the government’s push to get this done. We think that has to be done quickly. There have been discussions with the Shadow Minister for Local Government, and he also agreed that this was an important bill that needed to get through and to be introduced today, debated today and moved through to the Legislative Council as quickly as possible.

We have no issues with the bills that have been outlined: the Great Ocean Road and Environs Protection Bill 2019; the Forests Legislation Amendment (Compliance and Enforcement) Bill 2019, which I will come back to; the Justice Legislation Miscellaneous Amendments Bill 2019 and the Owners Corporations and Other Acts Amendment Bill 2019. The issue we have is with the forests legislation amendment bill. The Shadow Minister for Environment and Climate Change has indicated his strong desire to be able to move an amendment to the Forests Legislation Amendment (Compliance and Enforcement) Bill 2019 because he has grave concerns, and so does the Liberal and Nationals coalition. He wants to move an amendment to be able to make it fairer—and we believe it is a sensible amendment—for people that are involved in certain aspects of this particular bill who we believe will be at a disadvantage. It is for that reason that we are opposing the bill. We understand that the Leader of the House has said ‘if there is time’, but to date we still have not been into consideration in detail in this term of Parliament—full stop. So even if there has been time, we have not been afforded the opportunity to be able to go into consideration in detail.

Based on that, we will be opposing the government business program, but we do acknowledge that there has been cooperation in regard to the Casey council bill. We think that the government is correct in bringing it in for us to debate quickly to be able to get it up to the Legislative Council so that it can be hopefully passed by the end of today, but we still have concerns about the amendment that we want to raise on the forest legislation amendment bill.

Mr PEARSON (Essendon) (13:09): It gives me great joy and pleasure to be afforded this wonderful opportunity to rise to support the Leader of the House’s motion today on the government business program. Can I say at the outset: what an absolute cracker of a government business program it is. It is a rich and heavy program ensuring that the government is able to get on and deliver on its election commitments while also making sure that we deal with the matters that come up from time to time that require action from the Treasury bench, such as the bill before the house today in relation to the removal of Casey council. I listened to the Manager of Opposition Business’s contribution, and I do confess at the outset that it comes as no surprise that I am a mere neophyte in this place when compared to the lengthy career that the member for Rowville has had since he was elected here in October 1992. I preface that from the point of view that I find the member’s contribution curious—that the member is seeking to oppose the government business program because the shadow minister wishes to move an amendment. I would have thought that there was obvious capacity for any member of this place to seek to move, for example, a reasoned amendment, which would acquit essentially the desire of the shadow minister, rather than having to oppose the government business program outright. That would just be my thoughts. Perhaps the member might take the view that a reasoned amendment does not fully satiate their desires in relation to this piece of legislation.

Nonetheless, those opposite have chosen to oppose a very good government business program. Perhaps they might be doing it for their own internal reasons. Perhaps they feel it is important to rally the troops after an insipid question time where the Leader of the Opposition did not ask a single question. Again, I am a neophyte in this place—

Mr T Smith: On a point of order, Speaker, no-one on this side of the house is remotely interested in the member for Essendon’s observations from question time. His own colleagues do not think that he should be supported on the front bench, and we do not think he should be either. Therefore how about you ask the member for Essendon, Deputy Speaker, humbly, to get back to talking about the government business program?

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: There is no point of order, but I do ask the member to speak on the government business program.

Mr PEARSON: Look, it is an outstanding government business program, it is lengthy, and I would have thought that it would be heartily supported by those opposite. Clearly it is not being supported by those opposite for curious reasons. I mean, you look at the desultory performance today, the fact that many members opposite are not here right now. Perhaps they feel the burning need and desire to try and rally the troops by enforcing a division in relation to this outstanding government business program. You do have to wonder why. I cannot really understand how those opposite operate and work; I do not think I would really want to. It is a very, very good government business program. I am delighted to be afforded the opportunity of supporting it. I commend the government business program to the house.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: I call on the member for Gippsland South.

Mr D O’BRIEN (Gippsland South) (13:13): Thank you, Deputy Speaker. I do thank you sincerely for the opportunity to speak, and I am going to be very nice and polite because I just saw the look you gave the member for Kew, and it could power the state if it was put to good use, so I will be very nice in how I debate the government business program.

I would just take up a couple of the comments from the member for Essendon. We all love listening to the member for Essendon. I am very disappointed that the member for Essendon did not quote Cicero or some papal encyclical from the 12th century today, but I am sure, given the business program—and there are four bills to debate—that we will get the opportunity to hear him do so. I hope he will be spending his time tonight making sure he has got a good couple of quotes for us prepared on one of the bills on the government business program.

The member for Essendon said that we should not be opposing this because, if we want to put in a request to go into committee to debate a particular amendment, we should just move a reasoned amendment. Well, there are forms of the house, member for Essendon, and the forms of the house allow us to move an amendment. Unfortunately, given the government business program and no guarantee that we will be allowed to go into committee, we cannot do that. It is all well and good to say, ‘Oh, you could move a reasoned amendment’. Well, we do that from time to time on certain legislation, but on this particular one that is not the decision we would like to make because the amendment does not relate to the entire bill. It is all well and good to say, ‘You should just move a reasoned amendment’. It would be just as easy for us to say, ‘Well, give us half an hour, a bit of time to debate the bill’. We know what will happen. We have seen this time and time again. The Leader of the House says we will get some committee time if there is time, but we will find on Thursday afternoon that 24 government backbenchers will be given the notes for one of the bills. They will all get up and they will all pretty much say the same thing about how wonderful this piece of government legislation is, and, oh dear, we will run out of time. So spare us the lectures that we could do better.

On the business program, others have put forward their views on the legislation. I might add that there has been cooperation with respect to the City of Casey dismissal, and I look forward to the debate on that, having gone through this myself last year with the South Gippsland shire dismissal. I know this is something that the Parliament does not do lightly, but as was the case with South Gippsland, I think there is absolutely a very clear case here for the dismissal of Casey council. The investigations continue on that, but the monitor’s report has just been tabled and I look forward to hearing the member for Kew’s position on this.

That is why we are opposing the government business program. It is incumbent on the government to actually give the opposition and other members in the chamber the opportunity to debate things in detail, particularly when we have amendments that we would like to move on a particular piece of legislation. I will leave my contribution there, and I look forward to debate throughout the week.

Mr CARBINES (Ivanhoe) (13:16): I am pleased to make a contribution in support of the government business program, in particular, as outlined by the Leader of the House, the three bills to be introduced this week, in addition to the four bills to be debated. In amongst all of that, of course, is the matter of public importance debate, and no doubt the government will continue to prosecute our record of investment in government services. Not only that, but members have touched on the fact that we have seen the introduction of the Local Government (Casey City Council) Bill 2020, and I do look forward to the debate on that, to come shortly, to restore confidence and certainty to the ratepayers and community in Casey.

As has been touched on, as we pursue that bill—and I am sure it has the opportunity to get passage to the other place later today—I thought it is also important to note and to mention one of those four bills in particular, the Great Ocean Road and Environs Protection Bill 2019, which I know is a bill that reflects in large part election commitments made by both sides of the house. In particular it tries to pick up on those 20-plus different management organisations that have responsibility for the Great Ocean Road. Of course when we are talking about some 7 million visitors a year to the Great Ocean Road, it is a very significant role it plays in not only the tourist economy but more broadly across our country as not only an economic driver but a significant cultural institution from Torquay to Warrnambool. It is very significant to set up a statutory authority and better governance arrangements about who is responsible for driving further improvements and change and to make it clear to those who engage with the Great Ocean Road, support it or rely on it and those who live there, through better reflecting some responsibilities and accountabilities, how that great natural wonder—as well as the great contributions that have been made by our forebears in this development—will be supported in the future. Some of those findings of course also came out of the Wye River fire.

So I think there are some expanded conversations that we will have on that during debate on the bill. I am certainly keen to see whether that is backed up by election commitments from those opposite when the bill gets to the other place in relation to getting moving on establishing that statutory authority so that we can start to get some greater consolidation and direction on the future of the many investments and policy programs and accountabilities that are so important to the Surf Coast community on the Great Ocean Road.

I will just touch on those other bills, such as the Justice Legislation Miscellaneous Amendments Bill 2019 and particularly the Owners Corporations and Other Acts Amendment Bill 2019—really important stuff there. Many MPs would be aware of the gruelling nature of some of the complaints and issues that we deal with in the community from our constituents in relation to owners corporation regulations, and I think it is really important that we have time to debate and consider those matters.

What does surprise me a little bit though is that we have had some comments from those opposite in relation to the opportunity to go into consideration in detail on bills. There was not a specific bill mentioned that those opposite wanted to go into consideration in detail on to debate and discuss it in greater detail. I did not hear any particular bill nominated. Of course the lead speaker does have the opportunity to make available to the house any particular amendments in relation to a bill that they might want to make available for consideration of members, and that opportunity still remains available to members. This always does take me back, this debate on the opportunity to go into consideration in detail on bills. I can list several examples. One that readily comes to mind is the National Parks Amendment (Prohibiting Cattle Grazing) Bill 2015 and the opportunity that we had when we banned cattle from the High Country. The opportunity to go into consideration in detail on that bill is just one example of many where our government has provided opportunities to those opposite to debate matters in detail. Of course, given the lack of contributions from those opposite when it came to the Gender Equality Bill 2019 last week, I am sure they are doing their best to find other time that can be made available for debate on bills in this place.

I am looking forward to the contributions from all members. But in particular, with a very strong business program this week and the opportunities to also pick up and move, as we need to, on the Casey bill—just as we did last sitting week with the cooperation of the house in relation to condolences with regard to bushfires and to former Premier the Honourable John Cain—I am sure there is great scope and capacity for some amity across the house in pursuing the business program and seeing these bills make their way to the other place, particularly in relation to local government matters that are so critical to people in the south-east.

House divided on motion:

Motion agreed to.