Senator BOLKUS (9:57 AM) —by leave—I move opposition amendments Nos 1 and 4:

(1) Clause 5, page 7 (line 8), before "matter", insert "prescribed".

(4) Clause 11, page 13 (lines 18 to 22), omit paragraph (b), substitute:

(b) that the application of that alternative Commonwealth regime is more appropriate than taking any action under this Part because the activity involves a specified matter of national interest.

The amendments go to the definition of national interest. Under this regime, matters of national interest can be exempted from the operation of the environmental laws. The opposition has a concern that matters of national interest as defined by the government are too extensive.

We have two concerns. One is that the government is seeking to exempt matters relating to telecommunications activity and aviation. We understand that there would be circumstances in which telecommunications and aviation would relate to the national interest. But we think that the blanket exemption that could be given as a consequence of the definition of matters of national interest in the government's legislation is too broad. So amendment No. 1 is designed to allow for the prescription of matters relating to telecommunications and aviation and, as a matter of construct, matters can be prescribed in these two areas if it is assessed that they are in the national interest. We are not embracing the concept that all telecommunications and aviation matters are in the national interest but we move an amendment to allow for the exemption of certain telecommunications and aviation matters that may be in the national interest.

Amendment No. 4 goes to the exemption capacity proposed by the government in clause 11, page 13. The government is seeking to allow exclusion from the effect of environmental protection measures for reasons of administrative efficiency. It is our view that the government is seeking to give itself a pretty broad blank cheque.

Amendment No. 4 is designed to delete the capacity the government seeks to give itself to exclude matters for reasons of administrative efficiency. On looking at these two amendments, it seems to me that maybe they should not have been handled together. But, since we have given leave for them to be handled together and as I expect the vote will be the same on both, it is probably appropriate that we do handle them conjointly.