Page 2182 - Week 08 - Thursday, 10 September 1992
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Lastly, I am curious to have an explanation of the difference between two figures. The reported recurrent expenditure on Floriade of $701,000 appears in the report, whereas in the quarterly financial statement, which we discussed earlier, the figure is $715,000. Perhaps the Minister can explain where the other $14,000 went to. Madam Speaker, I have traversed the report in some detail; but I come back to the point that, although there are some things that need to be pursued as a result of it, generally speaking it is a good report, a comprehensive one, and I congratulate the department and the Minister for producing such an excellent report.
MR MOORE (12.08): Madam Speaker, it is with pleasure that I rise to speak on the annual report of the Department of the Environment, Land and Planning. Both last year and, as I recall, the year before, I took time out at the Estimates Committee in particular to compliment this department on their report. In those cases and again this year, it is the earliest report out. Mr Kaine has obviously taken the time to go through it thoroughly and is therefore in a better position at the time of the Estimates Committee to ask detailed questions and also to avoid questions where the answer is already in the annual report.
Mr Kaine: This department became very professional under my tutelage as Minister.
MR MOORE: Indeed. It seems to me that there is a lesson for many departments. It is a message that I put across last year in the Estimates Committee, and I take this opportunity to do so again. The accountability of government is so much more effective when members have available to them a report of this calibre. It gives us the background and the understanding of how the department is working and how it has worked over the previous year, its aims and objectives. It is important that we compliment the department for the work they have done in presenting the report. I do not intend at this point to go into the detail that Mr Kaine has gone into, although I compliment him on that. I look forward to doing so in the Estimates Committee; perhaps we will see some reasonable questions then.
I took some interest in the way the report dealt with planning. Perhaps there should have been more about strategic planning and the results of the reaction to the draft Territory Plan. It would be reasonable for most of that work, I suppose, to go into the next report. One of the great achievements of this year was the new Land (Planning and Environment) Act. That Act is so extensive that there will be a need for constant review to ensure that it is working. I have no doubt that the Minister is already finding that some areas of that complicated Act need reviewing. Perhaps there was further consultation on the draft Territory Plan because that legislation is so complicated. One of the reasons why it was readvertised - in addition to the reason given at the time, namely, that more people have moved into Canberra and they might like to comment - was that legal questions could have been raised over the validity of that process under the Act. The Minister might like to comment on that.
I take an interest in a very small statement at page 70 about motor sport. The Minister may also like to comment in his reply about a major review of motor sports facilities, including a consultancy study on Fairbairn Park and the Sutton Road driver training circuit that was undertaken. I wonder whether that has been completed. Is it available to the public? Will the Minister make it available to me?
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .