Page 1496 - Week 06 - Wednesday, 2 May 1990
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
have you addressed the question of the protection of the ACT's environment? That is difficult to quantify in dollar terms, I know, but it is held very dearly by all ACT residents. A reduction in their environment will be held as a cost to the community. Have you costed that? I bet you have not. Where have you costed the convenience for north Canberra residents? Have you costed that at all? Have you considered that the very many elderly residents in that area, who do not want to have to drive to Mugga Lane or west Belconnen, might have to make some other arrangement by way of getting a waste removal person to come to their house. Has that been costed? Has the provision of a trash pack or similar arrangement to some of these householders been costed? No. If it has, as Mr Moore has called for, let us see the publicly available cost-benefit analysis.
In conclusion, this decision made by Mr Duby is a stupid one which demonstrates his total ineptitude as a Minister. If the rest of the Alliance members go along with it, it demonstrates once and for all that, despite the divisions in their ranks, despite the fact that Dr Kinloch does not agree, that Mr Kaine, in his own statement, has clearly not supported Mr Duby's kind of action, they will hang together for the sake of remaining in government.
They have no mandate whatsoever to take this kind of action; they certainly do not have the agreement of the people affected; yet they will proceed with it in the interests of hanging onto government at any cost. What is the cost of that to the people of the ACT? It is this kind of lousy decision making. To quote the words on the front page of the Northside Chronicle, "It stinks!". That is what the people of Canberra think of you.
MR WOOD (11.17): Mr Speaker, more and more - - -
Mr Kaine: Rubbish! That was a great contribution to the art of debate.
MR WOOD: Well, you might make your contribution and reply. Rather than simply say "rubbish", which is a word that is not much on your mind, you might make your contribution to this debate and answer, one by one, those points that Ms Follett has raised. More and more it becomes evident that this was a silly decision, a bad decision, without adequate thought. Indeed, I suppose it is fair to say that Mr Duby was snowed by his department. The decision was pushed under his nose, he said "fine", and that was it. But it is not too late to change it. The matter might be resolved if the Minister swallows his pride a little, stands up in this Assembly and makes further concessions - he has made one or two - and says, "Okay, it was wrong; let us review it". That would be the right thing to do. I do not believe it would be a matter of losing dignity, and I promise you, Mr Duby, if you did that, I would sit here and not interject at all.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .