Page 2291 - Week 11 - Wednesday, 1 November 1989
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
. that the Minister responsible inform the Assembly (or the Speaker) the results of such an assessment.
I think that that recommendation takes into account my own major concern over this particular project, and I will come back to that. Let me, first of all, compliment the secretary of this committee, Peta Roberts, for her dedication and for her thoroughness in pursuing each area and each individual problem that I had, whether it was on a planning matter, a matter of zoology or a matter of transport - a whole series of matters. Whatever it was, she pursued it thoroughly and examined things carefully and came back with a series of options, a series of questions or a series of people that I could contact in order to satisfy myself. Let me say right now that, if I were dissatisfied with this particular report, then I would have written a minority report. I have not written a minority report because I am satisfied with the recommendations that the committee has come up with.
I would like to go back to why I originally wrote to the committee and asked that it look into this matter after first trying to get the Assembly, as a whole, to pass it onto the committee. Let me say now that, having been through that procedure, I think on the next occasion I will simply take it to the committee and use the procedure that I eventually did come to. There was a public perception problem about the National Aquarium which concerned the fish farm, the aquarium, and the fact that there were going to be fish there that were not native to the Murray-Darling at a spot that was so close to the Murray-Darling.
A lot of those problems had to do with the fact that we were told - and I was so informed - that the particular project was within the one in 100 years or the one in 500 years flood level. The map that I have with me clearly indicates that Mr Da Deppo's aquarium project is above those flood lines. That was for me the most important factor in my agreeing with the committee's report.
Let me take you to the original question of the aquarium; how it came to me and why I pursued it. It was brought to me originally by Mr Donohue of the Residents Rally, and one of the things that I had to do was sort out the issues and the personalities. While the other people were looking at just the issues, I was in the process of trying to determine how much was issue and how much was personality.
Let me also take you back to a series of corruption debates in this Assembly some time ago when we had a situation of the big, bad Paul Whalan and the even bigger, perhaps badder, Mr Geoff Da Deppo. Did $100,000 change hands? What evidence was there on Mr Collaery's corruption file? The evidence was presented. It was absolutely pathetic. And I must say it is a great joy to me to have the chance, now that I do not have to be tied by solidarity, to say that and to say how disgusted I was at being taken along by
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .