Page 534 - Week 02 - Wednesday, 20 February 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
dates, Mrs Noreen Parker, one of the residents, was sent a letter stating that it was 19 December. She has also heard 12 December mentioned. That was not a date that Mr Jensen mentioned and that is the confusion.
MR MOORE (4.05): I hope that Mr Jensen will be able to clarify that matter in a short time. Mr Speaker, I welcome hearing that the Government is going to re-examine the process of approval because that process has fallen down here. It is not good enough for the Chief Minister in question time - I think in response to a question from Mr Connolly, or maybe a question from Mr Stevenson the other day - to stand up and say, "Well, everything has been done according to the process". Clearly the process has some major fault in it. Anybody who has been out to Calwell and stood there and looked at what exactly is happening would, no doubt, understand that there is a major problem as far as this particular process goes. An improvement in the process is certainly a very important function. That this could happen is absolutely appalling.
It was interesting that Mr Collaery should refer to Rocky Knoll, because that case really is the reason why Mr Collaery is in this house.
Mr Collaery: It is not the only reason.
MR MOORE: It was the original motivating force. That drew Mr Collaery's attention to the fact that there was a lack of consultation, that there was a difficulty with the processes.
I am not saying that it was the only reason. Do not mistake me. What I am saying is that Rocky Knoll was a very important factor as far as Mr Collaery was concerned. I strongly recommend that he go out to Calwell and have a look.
Mr Collaery: I have looked at it. I have been there by helicopter. I have hovered over the house in a helicopter and looked at it.
MR MOORE: I welcome Mr Collaery's interjection that he has looked at it from a helicopter. I am sure he has a really good idea of the line of sight. I am sure Mr Collaery gained a good idea from the helicopter of the line of sight. I am sure he would have appreciated it if the Minister at the time, Clyde Holding, had flown over the top of Rocky Knoll in a light aircraft and felt that he had a case.
Mr Collaery: I would have shot it down.
MR MOORE: The emotion that Mr Collaery shows, even now, is quite appropriate. It is understandable that he would have shot him down. We realise that Mr Collaery is talking metaphorically; nevertheless, the extent of his emotion comes through in his voice. Mr Collaery, it is how these
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .