Page 1421 - Week 06 - Tuesday, 1 May 1990
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
really closing it up. I suppose there is a big brick wall across there now, to make sure that people do not go near the place. They were on overtime. Was that necessary? You are trying to save money. What did it cost you to get them out yesterday? Surely all you needed to do was shut the gate and put a padlock on it. But, of course, you wanted to make sure that there is absolutely no review. Dr Kinloch would not have a chance to ask you to change your mind.
Mr Temporary Deputy Speaker, north Canberra has lost a facility that it should have. I have lost a facility that I use regularly. Dr Kinloch has lost his facility; he has lost out doubly, I might say. But, most of all, Mr Duby has lost because I can tell you, after having petitions signed there on Saturday, there is not one vote left for him anywhere in north Canberra. Mr Duby and his party are the losers. I met some very angry people on Saturday. I met a member of a Liberal Party branch in that area who is considering his position.
The general view of people was that they pay their rates, as does everybody else in Canberra, and that they should have access to that facility. There is no point in having facilities 20 kilometres or more away. Those people in north Canberra believe that they are being discriminated against and that their rate payments are worth less to them than to anybody else. The real meaning of all this has been explained by the Chief Minister. Once again, we have a Cabinet Minister of this Government taking decisions without any consultation. I could go through them one by one. They do not want to consult.
There are two matters in this: one is the tip, and people are entitled to have a facility where they can dump their rubbish; the other is recycling. On the matter of the tip, as a pretty regular visitor there, I can tell Mr Duby - I am sure Dr Kinloch will support me - that most of the so-called compostables that he talks about are the heavy branches, the material that people cannot make into compost. It would be a good idea if he put a large-scale shredding machine there to do it for them.
Mr Duby said that Ms Follett had not answered his questions about the need for the place. She certainly did. Let me repeat them. She said that this is a well-used and valued facility. It is needed in that community, and the community wants it. How is that for a reason? They told me that very clearly on Saturday. That is particularly the case when you consider the age composition of the suburb. It is an older suburb, and people are not happy about driving any further than they need to. A further reason, Mr Duby, is that it is counterproductive. The cost may come out of different pockets, but it will cost the community more.
Finally, as explained by Rosemary Follett, it will contribute to the greenhouse effect, which at all levels we
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .