Page 625 - Week 03 - Wednesday, 21 March 1990
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
We support a joint Federal State Territory inquiry into the Very Fast Train proposal with a maximum public input to investigate its economic viability and its social and environmental impact, and to look at alternative routes.
That is the policy and that is the policy that Mr Moore formally embraced. Mr Moore, it is regrettable that you also chose to denigrate the interest and the contribution that could be made by the Conservation Council. That was a regrettable comment and further regrettable was that you used the privilege of this chamber to attack the Institution of Engineers as well. They have taken a very interesting role in current issues and I suggest that that was an unfair approach to take. I trust that any media present will give balance to that.
Mr Moore: I did not denigrate anybody. You are the denigrator. I do not mention names.
MR SPEAKER: Order!
MR COLLAERY: As for the - there is some noise from the pillar, Mr Speaker.
MR SPEAKER: Please proceed, Mr Collaery.
MR COLLAERY: Mr Speaker, I find it difficult to speak when the gentleman opposite me springs up - - -
Mr Moore: You just said that you enjoyed interjections.
Ms Follett: You said you liked it.
MR SPEAKER: Order!
MR COLLAERY: Mr Speaker, I would be grateful if you could keep Mr Moore on his couch because that is where we tried to get him when he was in the Rally.
The economic costs to the Territory that my colleague Mr Kaine referred to were, of course, infrastructure costs. For the record, I draw attention to the January 1990 report for the ACT Office of Industry and Development, paragraph 3.2: economic costs. For the record, and I trust any media listening have access to this document, my colleague Mr Kaine and the report were referring to infrastructure costs. Infrastructure costs mean costs such as the $6m that Mr Whalan approved as Minister, through the former Cabinet, for the infrastructure support of the Bruce Stadium. There have been other costs that we are committed to in regard to the Bruce Stadium and I am sure we have not finished seeing the bill. It ill behoves those opposite us, and particularly the current Opposition, to suggest that the infrastructure contribution for the common good, in the public interest, on a subject that has been broadly endorsed such as the VFT, is a handout or is a direct contribution of cash. It shows a total - - -
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .