Page 6213 - Week 19 - Tuesday, 17 December 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
MR KAINE: Perhaps we might go together to try this place out. But the fact that there are some people who will choose not to go there is not indicative of the view, in my opinion, of the majority of the people who live in Canberra, and it certainly says nothing about the opinion of tourists who come to Canberra. I believe that many of them will take a trip to the casino as a night out and will perhaps make a minor contribution to the well-being of our Consolidated Revenue, and that will be a good thing. Mr Deputy Speaker, the Liberal Party supports this proposal and it supports the legislation.
MR COLLAERY (4.14): There are a number of unanswered questions. I said to myself a couple of weeks ago that I would not respond to Mr Kaine's barbs about the Rally. I will not dignify them. We will see what the poll produces. We will see how the community regard the Rally and Mr Kaine's team.
Mr Deputy Speaker, the unanswered questions relate to some conceptual problems that we have with this Bill. The Rally have always said, and once Mr Moore said, that we would not allow specific laws to be passed to overcome planning instrument issues. This is a case of a law being passed to overcome planning considerations. I am going to put these remarks on the record. I do not believe that most members in the chamber are at all interested in my remarks or have any intention of giving them serious consideration, but I will put them on the record for those who historically will review this affair.
The Commonwealth gave us self-government at a time of unprecedented planning disputation in the Territory. It was a term of the Australian Capital Territory (Planning and Land Management) Act 1988, section 25 - I will refer to it as the PLM Act - that the new Assembly would, as soon as practicable, make laws providing for, among other things, establishing a Territory planning authority, conferring functions on that authority and establishing a plan. It was to make laws that should - in fact, the word used is "shall" and is mandatory - include provision for "the procedure for making the plan", including "ascertaining and considering the views of the public", and "procedures for just and timely review, without unnecessary formality", and so forth.
Much of that has been met in the planning Act we passed, the land Act, which is not law yet. But in the interim, before the land Act is law, this Federal Act, which overrides everything you do in this chamber, enjoins you as an Assembly to provide laws that provide us with scope for a procedure for ascertaining and considering the views of the public.
The Chief Minister has said, in response to a question without notice tabled today, that it is her intention to involve herself in consultation on this issue. She says:
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .