Page 6226 - Week 19 - Tuesday, 17 December 1991

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .


Mr Collaery: Pre-empted.

MR JENSEN: It is pre-empting it, as my colleague interjects. It is going to be very difficult, I suggest, for a government, after that sort of work has been completed, to say, "Sorry, the community really does not want a casino there now. We have come up with all sorts of problems associated with the site, from a parking and traffic management point of view, for example. It is not appropriate for the casino to go there".

For example, is the casino going to be allowed to operate 24 hours a day? If so, what effect will that have on the current traffic and parking problems within the area? We all know about those; we come to work every morning. We drive past there and we see the problems associated with that whole area in relation to parking. They are the sorts of issues that we are really pre-empting before the decision has been made.

Let me now turn to the conditions allowed by this legislation to be developed by the various government authorities during this period when the consultation process is going on around us. What is the Government going to do when the consultation process says that certain conditions should be applied to the development?

I am not sure whether the community was even made aware of all the arrangements which allowed the development of the building in which this casino is proposed to go, either as an interim facility or as a final structure, the Parkroyal Hotel, these offices and those adjacent to the Convention Centre. Whatever arrangements were made, including some protection for Glebe Park, may never see the light of day. No-one is really sure of the arrangement that was made between the Federal government of the day and the people who built those facilities, because it was not out on the table. That is something that the Rally has always argued for; something we fought for when we were debating the planning legislation in this place.

It is therefore important that the conditions to apply to the development are made public along the lines of the approved process agreed to by this Assembly in the Land (Planning and Environment) Bill. I trust that we will get a comment from the Chief Minister in her closing summary that that, in fact, will be the case.

The issue of betterment has not been mentioned at all by the Chief Minister. We understand that the lease for the Convention Centre is for just that - a convention centre - and does not include a casino, of course, and the new site only allows for a hotel. Certainly, it does not allow for a casino. So, will there be a requirement for betterment to be paid in the normal way? The Rally will certainly be looking carefully at this, as I am sure Mr Moore will be if he is to be consistent on the issue of betterment.


Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .