 |
Legislative
Council |
|
 |
||
| Sandra Kanck Deputy Leader Australian Democrats Member of the Legislative Council |
Parliament Index |
|
|
Legislative
Council |
|
|
||
| Sandra Kanck Deputy Leader Australian Democrats Member of the Legislative Council |
Parliament Index |
|
Adjourned debate on motion of Hon. Sandra Kanck:
That the following be referred to the Standing Committee on Environment, Resources and Development—
1. The economic, social and environmental impacts of the closure, at various heights, of Adelaide City Council's Wingfield Waste Management Centre;
2. The economic, social and environmental impacts of transporting waste to alternative near metropolitan and rural waste depot sites as a consequence of the closure of the Wingfield Waste Management Centre; and
3. Any other related matter.
The Hon. T.G. ROBERTS: The Labor Party supports the motion promoted by the Hon. Sandra Kanck. I will not go into too much detail. It is a referral motion to a committee. The committee will consider it and will report back to the Council.
The Hon. SANDRA KANCK: I thank honourable members for their speeches on this motion. The Government's position was fairly predictable. I am a little bit more elated about the Opposition's support for the motion. Certainly, I have believed, as I made clear when I first moved the motion, that the matter of the Wingfield Waste Management Centre and its height closure still needs to be properly and scientifically resolved, and the information provided for the Parliament when a Bill was passed earlier this year to set a height closure did not have that adequate scientific information.
We had recommendations made by the EPA, which we have seen in recent times to have made some very dodgy decisions. The recommendation about where one should locate a foundry in Mount Barker is one. We have seen a somewhat dismal performance on the Port Stanvac oil spill. I raised a question this afternoon about recommendations that the EPA had made about what one does with the filters from cars and trucks when they are changed. Again, they seem to be developing a record of giving poor advice. I think it is going to be valuable for the ERD Committee to be able to look at this and to be able to get independent scientific advice. So, I thank members for their contributions. The Council divided on the motion:AYES (9)
Elliott, M. J. Gilfillan, I.
Holloway, P. Kanck, S. M. (teller)
Pickles, C. A. Roberts, R. R.
Roberts, T. G. Weatherill, G.
AYES (cont.)
Zollo, C.
NOES (12)
Cameron, T. G. Crothers, T.
Davis, L. H. Dawkins, J. S. L.
Griffin, K. T. Laidlaw, D. V. (teller)
Lawson, R. D. Lucas, R. I.
Redford, A. J. Schaefer, C. V.
Stefani, J. F. Xenophon, N.
Majority of 3 for the Noes. Motion thus negatived.