Page 1795 - Week 06 - Wednesday, 1 May 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Why is that? It was apparent from Mr Humphries' remarks. He is terrified of the Labor Party promise on schools. He is terrified that the community recognises the promise of the Labor Party, from the leadership and every other member of the party - we speak with one voice on this issue - that schools can be reopened. He knows how the community will respond to that promise, and that is why he wants to rip the schools down - before people get a chance to vote on the issue. The real agenda here is to try to close the schools before the community gets a say at the ballot-box. We say that that is a dishonourable course of action and the Government ought to think again. The Government ought to give the community the appropriate chance to respond on this issue.
One possible defence of the 21-day consultation period might be that the community itself thinks it is adequate and that the community itself has been able to put submissions in. Indeed, as I understand it, a lot of submissions have been received or, if not received today, 1 May, will certainly be received by the statutory cut-off date of 4 May. The community in the affected regions is taking a vast interest in this issue and is producing excellent quality, thought-out, considered and well-researched submissions.
But, Mr Speaker, it is not possible for anyone in the community, even people who may be able to devote virtually full time to this effort, to properly come to grips with these planning issues in that short period, and we are hearing constantly from the community groups that they want more time. I understand that one group was given a promise of an enormously significant extension of time. They were told, "Well, look, if you cannot get your submission in on the statutory cut-off date", which is 4 May - incidentally, a Saturday - "get it in by Monday morning and that will be all right". This means, in effect, that the cut-off period is 20 days, not 21 days. You really have to have it in by close of business on Friday, but we have heard that this big-hearted, considerate, magnanimous Government has said to one community group that Monday morning would be all right. What a significant bending to community demands!
Mr Speaker, it is a farce. We have received correspondence from groups representing Holder school, Cook school, Lyons school and Hackett school, and we have met at some depth with people in the North Curtin area. They have all pointed to significant errors in these planning documents. Mr Humphries seems to think there is some suggestion that the North Curtin community is not concerned about its school. I can assure you that Mr Moore and I spent considerable time with very concerned residents of North Curtin who are horrified at some flagrant errors in these planning documents in relation to Curtin. They were able to point to areas that were classified on the coloured document that Mr Jensen made available to them, and they indeed were grateful to Mr Jensen for doing that. There were simple errors there. There were areas of car park shown as green space.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .