Page 535 - Week 02 - Wednesday, 20 February 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
people feel. Protect them. Use your influence in the Government to protect these people and to protect the reason why they bought those particular properties, why they spent the sum of money they did, why they chose this rather beautiful site in Calwell to build their houses. They now find that other houses are about to be built which will ruin all that. There has been a failure of the process to look after them and to protect them. That really is what we are talking about.
A short while ago we had Mr Jensen talking about the contours. I will just explain that. Mr Connolly pointed out that he is about 1.8 metres tall. It is equivalent to Mr Connolly standing on top of the roof of what people expect in a two-storey house. But also, when there is a one metre discrepancy in the contours, we expect yet another metre on top of Mr Connolly's height. Quite clearly, the view will be obstructed by that and the amenity that these people are entitled to is going to be ruined. Mr Jensen says, "Don't worry; the contour problem is going to be resolved when the walls are built".
Mr Jensen: I never said "contours". I said "heights".
MR MOORE: The heights of the contours are going to be resolved.
Mr Jensen: I said the height levels as opposed to contours.
MR MOORE: The height levels. That is exactly what we are talking about, Mr Jensen - the height levels, the metre discrepancy. The height levels are measured according to the contours. So we are now talking about that being resolved after the walls are built. It is not good enough.
The Government must wear some responsibility to look after people under these sorts of circumstances. They had a reasonable expectation, a fair understanding, of what they were buying into and what was going to happen. That fair expectation, for whatever the case, for whatever the reason, has been dashed. The Government does not have to accept fault, but it must take some responsibility to see whether there is any way that it can be restored. If it means going back to the plans, taking out the foundations and wearing some of the cost, or negotiating the cost with the residents for changing the concept so that these houses are dug further into the hill in order to resolve the problem, then so be it.
Occasionally the community as a whole must wear the cost of looking after something that has gone wrong in the process. Even if that process technically has been followed, clearly in the spirit there has been a breakdown. Mr Collaery, of all people, knows exactly what it feels like to be on the receiving end of this. It is to him in particular, and to Mr Jensen, that I appeal to use the Government's influence to see what they can do to resolve this in a satisfactory
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .