• Abstract and Figures
• Public Full-text

5193 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL AND LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Thursday 4 May 2000 _____ JOINT SITTING TO ELECT A SENATOR The two Houses met in the Legislative Council Chamber at 3.40 p.m. to elect a senator in the place of Senator David Brownhill, resigned. Mr CARR: Mr Clerk, I move: That the Hon. Meredith Anne Burgmann, President of the Legislative Council, act as President of the Joint Sitting of the two Houses of the Legislature for the election of a senator in the place of Senator David Brownhill, resigned, and that in the event of her absence the Hon. John Henry Murray, Speaker of the Legislative Assembly, act in that capacity. Mrs CHIKAROVSKI: I second the motion. Motion agreed to. The Hon. Dr Meredith Burgmann took the chair. Mr CARR: I present proposed rules for the regulation of the proceedings at the joint sitting, which have been printed and circulated. I move: That the proposed rules, as printed and circulated, be now adopted. Mrs CHIKAROVSKI: I second the motion. Motion agreed to. The PRESIDENT: I am now prepared to receive nominations with regard to a person to fill the vacant place in the Senate caused by the resignation of Senator David Brownhill. Mr SOURIS: I propose Mr Sandy Macdonald to hold the place in the Senate rendered vacant by the resignation of Senator David Brownhill, and I announce that the candidate is willing to hold the vacant place if chosen. Senator David Brownhill was, at the time he was chosen by the people of the State, publicly recognised to be an endorsed candidate of the National Party of Australia and publicly represented himself to be an endorsed candidate of that party. Mr Sandy Macdonald is a member of the same political party. The Hon. D. J. GAY: I second the proposal. The PRESIDENT: Does any member desire to propose any other person to fill the vacancy? There being no other nomination, the question is, That Mr Sandy Macdonald be chosen to hold the place in the Senate rendered vacant by the resignation of Senator David Brownhill. Question resolved in the affirmative. The PRESIDENT: I declare that Mr Sandy Macdonald has been chosen to hold the place in the Senate rendered vacant by the resignation of Senator David Brownhill. Mr CARR: I move: That the President be requested to inform His Excellency the Governor as soon as practicable that Mr Sandy Macdonald has been chosen to hold the place in the Senate rendered vacant by the resignation of Senator David Brownhill. The Hon. M. R. EGAN: I second the motion. Motion agreed to. The PRESIDENT: I now declare the joint sitting closed. The joint sitting closed at 3.45 p.m. _____ 5194 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 4 May 2000 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL Thursday 4 May 2000 ______ The President (The Hon. Dr Meredith Burgmann) took the chair at 11.00 a.m. The President offered the Prayers. ASSENT TO BILLS Assent to the following bills reported: Appropriation (Budget Variations) Bill Electronic Transactions Bill Occupational Health and Safety Amendment (Sentencing Guidelines) Bill SUMMARY OFFENCES AMENDMENT BILL Bill received and read a first time. Motion by the Hon. J. W. Shaw agreed to: That standing orders be suspended to allow the passing of the bill through all its remaining stages during the present or any one sitting of the House. TABLING OF PAPERS The Hon. Carmel Tebbutt tabled the following papers: Report and Determinations of Local Government Remuneration Tribunal under sections 239 and 241 of the Act, dated 27 April 2000. Report on the Review of the Mines Rescue Act 1994 conducted in accordance with the Act, dated April 2000. Ordered to be printed. PROTECTION OF THE ENVIRONMENT OPERATIONS AMENDMENT (LITTERING) BILL Second Reading The Hon. CARMEL TEBBUTT (Minister for Juvenile Justice, Minister Assisting the Premier on Youth, and Minister Assisting the Minister for the Environment) [11.06 a.m.]: I move: That this bill be now read a second time. The second reading speech is essentially the same as the Minister's in the other place, although it incorporates information about the amendments that were carried in the other place and of a proposed Government amendment. I seek leave to have the second reading speech incorporated in Hansard. Leave granted. As the Minister for the Environment pointed out in the other place, successive New South Wales State governments from both sides of politics have achieved a great deal with respect to litter prevention and management over the past two decades. Starting with the introduction of the Do The Right Thing campaign in the late 1980s, litter management strategies have included the introduction of the Environmental Offences and Penalties Act in 1989, which introduced on-the-spot fines for littering; the Carr Government's three-year, $60 million stormwater program, which provides a framework for managing littering as a component of stormwater pollution, which provides dollars for infrastructure; the negotiation of the waste reduction plan for the beer and soft drink industry which contains a series of anti-littering measures. 4 May 2000 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 5195 The Carr Government's anti-littering package, of which this bill is one part, builds on these achievements. However, despite these early successes, and the considerable efforts of Clean Up Australia and the Keep Australia Beautiful Council, as well as the hard work of local councils and service organisations, littering remains a problem—both in aesthetic and environmental terms. The broader community recognises past achievements but expects governments to renew efforts to prevent littering in the first place. Moreover, when it does occur, to ensure that it is cleaned up. Our package will provide this renewal through identifying weaknesses in our current regulatory approach and correcting them; taking account of research relating to littering behaviour and factoring this into large-scale public education efforts; providing support to key community organisations to deal with local littering issues; and bringing together key government agencies to look at the issue of littering on public lands. The Protection of the Environment Operations Amendment (Littering) Bill represents a major step forward in a continuing process to have effective regulation available to deal with littering. In 1989—when the then Minister for the Environment, Tim Moore, introduced the Environmental Offences and Penalties Act—on-the-spot fines first became a feature of the environmental regulation landscape. This was an extremely important development and one that has greatly assisted in policing a range of environmental laws. Under this scheme, on-the-spot fines for littering became available. But close examination of the extent to which this tool has been used for littering offences reveals that it has not played its proper part as a deterrent for this behaviour. Levels of on-the-spot fines issued annually in New South Wales for the past 10 years average around 600 to 700 per annum. Approximately five times this number is issued annually in Victoria. The reality in New South Wales is that with so few fines issued each year, most people would view littering as an offence that is extremely unlikely to attract a fine. There needs to be a view in the community that there are suitably strong sanctions and a very real threat of being caught and fined. There is a range of explanations for why there are so few infringement notices issued for littering in New South Wales. In summary, the existing littering provisions have the following problems: they define littering in too narrow a manner; they provide no flexibility for enforcement officers in distinguishing between minor and more serious offences; they contain no specific provisions to deal with some major new littering problems, such as those associated with the distribution of some types of advertising; they do not allow for littering in certain private places to be dealt with. The bill considerably expands the definition of litter, while at the same time addressing local government concerns about the existing definition and its premise that refuse only becomes litter if it has little or no value. The expanded definition is far more practicable and workable. Of the other problems identified with the existing framework, the lack of flexibility in the type of fine is seen by many enforcement officers as a particular problem. Anecdotal evidence suggests that there is some unwillingness to issue a blanket $200 fine for minor offences. Equally, there is a view that $200 is insufficient sanction for littering behaviour that is likely to cause physical harm to people, animals or property. The Government seeks to address this problem by creating three levels of fine: one for littering with small items; one for general littering and littering from vehicles; one for aggravated littering. The bill seeks to amend the relevant schedule of the Protection of the Environment Operations (Penalty Notices) Regulation 1999 to create a number of penalty notice offences concerning the proposed littering offences. In keeping with the principles of the use of infringement notices for other environmental offences, penalties for corporations would be double those for individuals. One area of constant annoyance to many people is the habit of numerous smokers to throw away carelessly their cigarette butts— particularly unextinguished butts. The penalties recognise this problem and set appropriate on-the-spot fines: $60 for depositing of an extinguished cigarette; $200 for depositing a lit cigarette and $375 for a lit cigarette that is deposited in circumstances of aggravation. Depositing of a syringe will be aggravated littering, which will have an on-the-spot fine of $375. Dealing with litter that stems from the way in which certain forms of advertising are distributed is an important element of the bill. Distributing printed material is an important aspect of the promotional programs of many businesses.

Load more

  63

Copy Link