Site icon The House in Review

In the House – Thursday 26 September 2019

Following the passing of the Reproductive Health Care Reform Bill (now the Abortion Law Reform Act 2019), the House conducted a standard private members’ business day on Thursday. This involved debating the disallowance of two regulations regarding licences for music festivals and the consideration of private members’ bills and motions.

 Disallowance Debate

Liquor Amendment (Music Festivals) Regulation 2019Gaming and Liquor Administration Amendment (Music Festivals) Regulation 2019

These regulations were introduced in February 2019 following the tragic deaths of six young adults at music festivals. The purpose of the regulations were to give targeted support to higher risk music festivals to run safer events. They provided for a new type of liquor licence for music festivals and for the Independent Liquor and Gaming Authority to direct particular applicants to apply for a music festival licence.

The Legislative Council’s Regulation Committee conducted a three month inquiry into the regulations and publishing its report in late August. The committee found that the regulations had been implemented without proper consultation and had caused uncertainty in the music festival industry. The committee recommended, based on broad industry support, that the Legislative Council disallow the regulations and that a regulatory roundtable be established to develop a more appropriate framework.

Mr Graham (Labor Party) brought the disallowance motions on for debate and spoke in strong support of the Regulation Committee’s findings and recommendations. He indicated that the regulations did not adequately protect music lovers who attend festivals and had damaged the music festival industry. In opposing disallowance, the Government indicated that if the regulations were removed, there would be no means to properly regulate the festivals sector just as we enter the festival season.

The regulations were disallowed on division (21 to 18) with all parties except for the Government, One Nation and the Christian Democratic Party supporting the motion. These were the first regulations disallowed by the Legislative Council since 2014.

 Bills

Plastic Shopping Bags (Prohibition on Supply by Retailers) Bill 2019

The bill prohibits retailers from supplying single-use, lightweight plastic shopping bags to customers and provides that retailers can be investigated and fined up to $5,500 for non-compliance.

Debate on the bill introduced by Ms Sharpe (Labor Party) resumed from Thursday 6 June 2019. Mr Franklin (The Nationals) indicated that the Government did not support the bill as it was already taking action on plastic waste  through large scale programs and interventions, including the 2018 National Waste policy.

Ms Faehrmann (The Greens) and Mr Field (Independent) both spoke in support of the bill indicating that the ban on plastic bags should have been done a long time ago as New South Wales remains the only State not to commit to the plastic bag ban. He noted that this is the third time a bill on this matter had been introduced in the Council.

In reply, Ms Sharpe conveyed her disappointment that the Government was not supporting the bill and that it would likely not pass. She stated that this was one of the easiest steps the Government could take to mitigate the pollution of plastic bags. To Ms Sharpe’s surprise, the second reading was agreed to on division (18 to 16) and bill passed the Council. It is now with the Legislative Assembly for concurrence. The the bill must also pass the Assembly in order to become law.

Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Amendment (Restrictions on Stock Animal Procedures) Bill 2019

The bill was introduced by Mr Pearson (Animal Justice Party) to prohibit the performance of the mules operation on sheep (the removal of strips of skin to prevent infection) and to require the administration of pain relief in certain procedures involving stock animals.

During his second reading speech, Mr Pearson stated that the bill will help improve the treatment of stock animals which do not have the same legislative protections as domestic animals by outlawing practices such as mulesing and mandating the administration of pain relief procedures. Mr Pearson further noted that this would bring New South Wales in line with other jurisdictions. At the conclusion of his speech, debate was adjourned for 5 calendar days.

Crimes Amendment (Zoe’s Law) Bill 2019

Debate resumed on the bill introduced by Reverend Nile which seeks to amend the Crimes Act 1900 in relation to criminal acts resulting in the “serious harm to or the destruction of an unborn child”. Two members contributed to the debate, both stating their opposition to the bill.

Mr Martin (Government) noted the Premier’s commitment to law reform in this area, and foreshadowed the Government’s intention to introduce new legislation to better recognise the loss of an unborn child as a result of a criminal act. Mr Martin stated that the process of developing the legislation will include targeted consultation with stakeholders including medical and legal experts.

Ms Boyd (Greens) opposed the bill stating that it is unnecessary, as a 2005 amendment to the Crimes Act changed the definition of “grievous bodily harm” to include “the destruction (other than in the course of a medical procedure) of the foetus of a pregnant woman”.

At the conclusion of her speech, Ms Boyd moved that the question on the second reading be amended by omitting “be now read a second time” and inserting instead “be read this day six months”, a procedural motion that would prevent the bill being considered again in this session of Parliament. Debate was then adjourned.

Motions

The following four motions were debated:

Orders for Papers Motions

The following four orders for government papers were also agreed to by the House:

 Asbestos in public schools (due 3 and 28 October)

 Native vegetation code review (due 10 October)

 Temporary soil weirs on the Peel River (due 17 October)

 Maules Creek coal mine (due 17 October).

All orders for papers resolved by the House, including due dates and any documents returned, can be viewed on our Orders for Papers webpage.

 Adjournment debate

The following members spoke to the adjournment debate:

 

Exit mobile version