Rachel Siewert (WA, Australian Greens) Share this | Hansard source

Thank you for that interjection. In that case, I am extremely disappointed that the government did not even bother to respond to the Greens amendments in their summing up. As I said, these are the result of a carefully thought out analysis of the bill. Although I could not be at the committee hearing personally because I was in another committee hearing, a member of my staff sat in all day, listened to everybody, read every submission and has read the bill very carefully. We believe these amendments contribute significantly to improving this bill. I would have thought that the government would have given them more attention than to sling off at them, implying that they had already been dealt with when in fact they had not, and would have given them due consideration.

Having said that, I would like to ask the government for the clarification that I indicated in my second reading debate speech I would be seeking. As I understood it, during their evidence to the committee inquiry the department gave a rationale about why it would not be advisable to include a requirement in the bill that the plan should be finalised within two years. That rationale was because of the question of what happens if you do not get it done, and that leads to all sorts of complicated legal issues. As I understood it, there was an implication that the government would be clarifying, during the discussion, that the minister would undertake to direct the authority to finalise the first basin plan within two years of establishment. Is the government prepared to make that commitment so that the community can be assured that the intent is for the first basin plan to be completed within two years?