Senator O’BRIEN (11:15 AM) —by leave—The opposition oppose schedule 1 in the following terms:

I move opposition amendments (2), (4), (8), (12), (14), (22), (26) and (28) on sheet 5237:

Our position in relation to those items can be put fairly succinctly: the opposition is opposed to any shortening of public consultation and approval time lines. That is the essence of that array of amendments to various aspects of the bill.

Earlier this year, the Minister for Transport and Regional Services, Mr Vaile, said, ‘I have received a number of representations from government MPs and senators asking me to extend the 45-day working period for consultation to 60 working days.’ If there was historical evidence of the minister having due regard for community and local government concerns when it comes to sensitive airport development, the revised time lines, which would have brought the planning regime into line with state and territory planning processes, may well have been acceptable. But the unwillingness to reduce consultation time lines on our part is a manifestation of our distrust of this government in the implementation of the process.

Following consultations with the shadow minister, Labor members and senators expressed equal concern about the matter—and, for that matter, so do their constituencies. It is a fact that the government’s record on airport development, with the brickworks in Perth and the retail developments in Adelaide and Essendon, for example, demonstrates the reasons we in the Labor Party are not prepared to accept any reduction in consultation or approval times. These processes are very important and the Commonwealth discharges a very significant and onerous responsibility in dealing with them. We believe that it is an appropriate responsibility for the Commonwealth, but we do not believe that at the present time the Commonwealth is demonstrating the necessary level of respect for the views of the community in the way that it is handling this process. In our opinion, our agreeing to these propositions would almost be a decision to accept the government’s bona fides in that regard.

We propose that there be no change to consultation or approval time lines. That will have some effect on the period of time available for proper consultation and the proper consideration of matters. We think that that is appropriate. We think that there is no reason the government could not live with such a proposition and we believe that the industry sector would have no significant problems living with this particular series of amendments. We know that the government is seeking to do otherwise. We cannot support the government’s view, hence we press these amendments.