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

I move Greens amendment (23) on sheet 5629:

(23)  Schedule 2, page 308 (after line 5), after item 106, insert:

106C  Subsection 178(6)

Omit “must”, substitute “may”.

This amendment relates to the composition of the authority and it changes one word—that is, it omits ‘must’ and substitutes ‘may’. This relates to whether the authority can have more than one full-time member if it needs to.

As we have been talking about last night and today, it is very important that the authority is set up and gets on with its job. It is facing a very difficult task, and we think the authority may need the opportunity to have more than one full-time member. We are not saying that it shall have more than one full-time member. We are changing the word ‘must’ to ‘may’ to allow for the possibility that, if it is needed, the authority can in fact have two—or more, for that matter—full-time members to enable it to get on with the task.

We are setting the authority an extremely hard task. There is no doubt about that. There is no shirking from the fact that they are going to have a difficult task. We should be able to facilitate their role as much as possible. That is why we are merely seeking to change ‘must’ to ‘may’, so that there is the ability for them to put on more full-time members if they in fact see the need.

I will acknowledge straight away—and the coalition may need to bear this in mind—this is an amendment to Mr Turnbull’s bill. However, you have seen the light on a number of issues, and I encourage you to see the light on this amendment. Given the nature of the activities the authority have to carry out, I think we should give them the ability, if they need to, to be able to have more than one full-time member.