Dr WOODRUFF question to PREMIER, Mr ROCKLIFF
Yesterday, you declared Tasmania has too many laws. You did not give any examples. You just want fewer laws. If this was not inexplicably stupid enough, you then announced your ministers will have a one law in one out policy. Want to regulate a new technology or product? You have to deregulate another. Want to introduce a new elder abuse crime? Better legalise arson.
It is a fact that as our society develops and gets more complex, a greater amount of legislation is required. A law quota cannot and will not work. This is a pathetic far right virtue signalling on your part and we are honestly embarrassed for you. Will you put this reckless, radical rhetoric behind you and commit to approaching legislation like a sensible adult? Or will this parliament have to spend the rest of the term supervising you like a babysitter?
Mr Ellis – What did you do yesterday?
The SPEAKER – Before I call the Premier to answer the question – and tell Mr Ellis that he just got his first warning – I note that there is an awful lot of latitude given in questions and the preambles to questions. The Standing Orders require that they do not contain argument or opinion. Some of the comments made in the question stray a little close to being personal remarks. I remind members of that for the future. However, the question stands.
ANSWER
Honourable Speaker, I thank the Leader of the Greens, Dr Woodruff, for the question. I am not sure what you did over the summer, but you have come back a little differently with some of the –
Dr Woodruff – I have been walking in the wilderness and I am feeling very energised, thank you.
Mr ROCKLIFF – A little too much sun? I do not know, but the zingers, the personal attacks and questions laced with irony – first, when you talk about embarrassment, these types of questions are embarrassing.
You presented some legislation to me yesterday which I can rule out. We spoke about that yesterday. Why would we not we look at the laws that are no longer applicable in 2025? Why would we not look at areas of regulation that are burdensome to business, small, medium or large? I clearly laid down criteria for protecting the environment, looking after the community, public safety, and other areas. We need to make sure we have the best possible laws across those three areas, but there are other areas of regulation that are simply getting in people’s way. I hear it often.
The Business Council of Australia report 37 licences to open a cafe. That is state, federal and local. There are federal laws which we have less influence on, but surely as local and state governments we can work together on ensuring that there is regulation there to protect consumers, but also regulation that we can take away that is strangling business. Business in Tasmania is very resilient despite this, but we can make it easier. I look forward to the work in this Chamber where we do take away unnecessary and burdensome regulation and laws.
SUPPLEMENTARY QUESTION
Dr WOODRUFF – A supplementary question, Speaker?
The SPEAKER – I will hear the supplementary question.
Dr WOODRUFF – My question was whether the Premier would put the radical, reckless rhetoric behind. That was specifically about the one law in, one law out policy. That is not sensible or moderate. Will you please tell Tasmanians whether you are going to stay committed to that approach?
The SPEAKER – I draw the Premier to it; it was part of the original question.
Mr ROCKLIFF – We talk about ‘radical’ and ‘reckless’. We talk about community safety. What about your endorsement of people climbing the roof of this heritage building yesterday?
Dr WOODRUFF – Point of order, Speaker, Standing Order 45, relevance.
The SPEAKER – I will accept the point of order, Standing Order 45, relevance. Premier, I draw you to the supplementary question. You only have 35 seconds left. I am more than happy to countenance debate on that other issue at another time.
Dr Woodruff – One law in, one law out. Are you going to stick to it?
The SPEAKER – Thank you, Leader of the Greens. You are warned as well for constant interjecting.
Mr ROCKLIFF – I always respect your ruling, honourable Speaker. The member mentioned ‘radical’ and ‘reckless’. That is exactly how I would describe your mates climbing the roof yesterday. I was very disappointed to see endorsement of such actions which not only can cause damage to a heritage building but put their own safety and staff safety at risk
The SPEAKER – The Premier’s time for answering the question has expired. I call the Leader of the Opposition. We are almost there. Let us keep everyone in the room.
