Page 1456 - Week 05 - Wednesday, 17 April 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
probably did not even know. He probably did not even realise that there was a boomerang whizzing around this Assembly as he was standing up to speak.
I know that I am crowding out my colleagues, but just for once my exuberance exceeds me. My final point is that the Government has decided to ask the Chief Minister to put forward possible alternative uses for these sites, in the light of public comment. I give you my undertaking that that is the Government's decision. The Government has not made a decision that pre-empts any of these options in these documents. One of the options is that the sites be retained for community facilities. If you look at the definition of "community facilities", that includes schools. So, one of the options is, in effect, the status quo.
I think that a great injustice has been done to our Government, and particularly to the Residents Rally, in this debate, because it is a most unfair proposition - a scaremongering proposition - to suggest that finite decisions have been taken in advance of public consultation. It ill-behoves the Labor Party, which closed all those places and left us vandalised establishments, to produce the similar type of green draft proposal for public comment as we have and now to wax eloquent about clear English and all the rest. Mr Wood fell down on the side of Mr Moore. I think both Mr Wood and Mr Moore fell over on this issue. Clearly they have.
MR HUMPHRIES (Minister for Health, Education and the Arts) (12.28): Mr Speaker, I will not speak for very long. Mr Moore's sentiments about the necessity for the Assembly to be a consultative forum are sentiments with which I would generally tend to agree. There are obviously important fora for views to be expressed and for views to be debated; the Assembly should be one of those fora. I think, in general, we should be looking at extending and strengthening the consultative processes. I have always considered, mind you, those public documents issued by the ITPA and the NCDC, and now our ACTPA, to be in that vein, but they need to be strengthened as the ACT has evolved into self-government. As I said, in general, I agree, but I have to say that in this particular case I have my suspicions quite justifiably aroused by comments made by Mr Moore earlier yesterday on the question of - - -
MR SPEAKER: Order, Mr Humphries! In accordance with standing order 77, this debate is interrupted. You may resume the debate next time private members' business is called on.
MR WOOD: I rise under standing order 46.
MR SPEAKER: Do you claim to have been misrepresented?
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .