Page 3303 - Week 10 - Wednesday, 19 October 2022
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
Collective have become an interesting community trial, where people become involved in picking up leaves and the like. In this round of funding—I do not have the exact figures to hand—a significant component of the budget is actually about the community education approach and not simply physical assets, because clearly we need to take a multi-pronged approach to dealing with nutrients flooding into waterways. I am happy to provide the figures on notice.
Belconnen—Healthy Waterways project
MS CLAY: My question is to the Minister for Water, Energy and Emissions Reduction. Minister, at last night’s Belconnen Community Council there was a lot of discussion about a proposed Healthy Waterways project near Emu Creek in Belconnen. There was huge enthusiasm for Healthy Waterways, but there were some concerns about this particular proposal. The main concerns were that the DA was lodged before consultation began—it has now been removed—that the project looked more like an engineered water filter than a beautiful habitat-rich wetland, and that people were not sure if there was time for their views to be genuinely considered. Can you tell me how you will proceed with this project?
MR RATTENBURY: I will start with the issue of the development application. It was submitted prior to the consultation commencing. That was an error of process, and I apologise to the community for that. It was certainly not the intent to look as if it was a fait accompli. Once I became aware of this issue the EPSDD was advised to withdraw the development application and proceed with community consultation.
That community consultation is now underway. Any future DA will not be submitted until that process of consultation is finished and a consideration of the feedback has been taken into account. Regarding the DA, that is where it now stands. We apologise to the community today, because obviously a step like that can breed some distrust or perhaps some cynicism about the sincerity, but I want to ensure the community that we are keen to hear their views on this project.
In terms of the design of the project, this is a different type of project. When I launched it, we talked about a sub-surface wetland. The idea in this case is that, with respect to the roots of the various plants, the water flows under the ground and gets filtered in that way before it hits Lake Ginninderra, ideally in a much cleaner state as a result of the sub-surface filtration. I am very interested to hear this feedback if people feel that it is not what they had in mind. That is obviously the point of the consultation.
What we will do now is assess that community feedback and consider it in light of people—perhaps having heard the presentation last night at Belconnen Community Council, for example—having a better understanding of why the project has been designed in the way it has, and think, “Actually, that’s fine,” or whether they still have views that it is not what they had in mind. That is the work that will continue from here as part of the consultation process.
MS CLAY: If enough locals have strong views, do you think the project might include more nature elements, better amenity and maybe a pond?
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video