Page 4804 - Week 16 - Monday, 25 November 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
MR JENSEN (2.46), in reply: I am wondering where members of the house are at the moment, but never mind. I will deal with the points that have been raised. If Mr Kaine had listened very carefully to the speech that I gave when this matter was introduced, particularly in relation to the requirements for the authority to consider recommendations submitted by the Conservator of Wildlife, the Minister for Urban Services, et cetera, he would recall that I indicated that we have long been unhappy with the degree of information provided by government agencies in response to a draft variation and the provision of information in draft proposals put out for public consultation.
Comments like "There are no traffic problems perceived in relation to this draft variation, full stop" have long been considered to be an issue from both the Rally's point of view and the community's point of view because there is no information and no detail to back that up.
I am quite happy to accept the comment made by Mr Kaine in relation to the need for "the Minister for Urban Services" to be changed to something along the lines of "the Minister responsible for matters concerning traffic management and safety". I am quite happy to move that amendment during the detail stage.
The other issue relates to the Australian Capital Territory Electricity and Water Authority. As we know, the Australian Capital Territory Electricity and Water Authority is responsible for sewerage and stormwater. The key point there is to make sure that there are no problems in the authority's area with any of these draft proposals. Once again, a simple comment that there are no problems is not considered sufficient. That is why we have the recommendation in proposed new subsection 12(2), which says:
A recommendation referred to in subsection (1) shall specify the reasons for the recommendation.
In other words, this requires those people to justify why they make those comments.
Mr Wood seems to think, for some reason or other, that just because they say something they have looked at all the issues. I can assure Mr Wood that there are a number of situations around this Territory in respect of which those statements have been made in the past. In fact, they have been completely inadequate; they have allowed problems to go ahead. They have made those sorts of statements; but it has been proved that, in fact, they were wrong.
In the case of the Bateman Street issue, at least they are prepared to acknowledge now that there is a speeding problem and that something has to be done about it. In the past it was indicated to the community that there was no problem. It was only after considerable pressure on the part of the community, given a bit of a plug along by me,
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .