Note: Where available, the PDF/Word icon below is provided to view the complete and fully formatted document
 Download Current HansardDownload Current Hansard   

Previous Fragment    Next Fragment
Thursday, 20 November 1986
Page: 2603


Senator HAINES —My question is directed to the Minister representing the Minister for Primary Industry. As part of a question to the Minister last Thursday, I asked him on what evidence had the Minister for Primary Industry based his judgment that no National Estate values were threatened by the logging in Jackeys Marsh. The Minister failed to answer that part of the question so I ask again: Did the Minister for Primary Industry have any evidence on which to base his claim that no National Estate values were being threatened by the logging of Jackeys Marsh? Does the Minister for Primary Industry still believe that no National Estate values are threatened by that logging? Was the Minister's mistaken belief that no National Estate values were threatened a factor in the Government's reluctance to back up the Prime Minister's pledge, made a week earlier, to protect Jackeys Marsh? If the Minister for Primary Industry was wrong in his statement about Jackeys Marsh, what guarantee can the Minister give of the accuracy of his advice to Cabinet in November of last year to the effect that logging would not endanger National Estate values in the 21 other National Estate areas that the Minister for Arts, Heritage and Environment recommended should not be logged?


Senator WALSH —In response to the last part of the question, I am not sure whether the facts are entirely in accordance with what Senator Haines said. I will see whether Mr Kerin has anything to say about that. Principally I was asked on what evidence Mr Kerin's judgment was based. If that was part of the question asked last week, I apologise because I have not got an answer to that and I still do not know on what evidence it was based, but I will try to get an answer.