Page 3430 - Week 13 - Wednesday, 25 November 1992
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Mr Kaine: We might.
MR LAMONT: It would be very difficult. The motion also mentions community health and related facilities. I believe that Sylvia Curley House would be inappropriate for such facilities. So, there is one question that is raised about the exclusivity of Mr Moore's motion.
Mr Moore: Where do you get the exclusivity idea from, apart from Trevor?
MR LAMONT: That is the effect of your motion, Mr Moore.
Mr Moore: No; you are wrong.
MR LAMONT: I am sorry; I am not wrong. That is what the words say and that is the intent. It can be construed in no other way.
Mr Kaine: But you did not believe me when I told you that an hour ago.
MR LAMONT: That is not what I said an hour ago, Mr Kaine. The Leader of the Opposition misquotes me, Madam Speaker. With the admission of the Deputy Leader of the Opposition last night, I can understand why that may be the case. So, what in fact we have - - -
Mr Moore: You have nothing to argue on, so you are squirming.
MR LAMONT: Not really. Mr Moore's motion proposes an exclusivity. The reason why he is interjecting as much as he is, which is not unusual for Mr Moore, is that the penny has finally dropped in relation to what he has done. When you raise these types of issues, Mr Moore can finally see. As I said, the penny has finally dropped. The Labor Party is committed and has announced in this place that it will put on that site those things outlined in paragraph (1) of Mr Moore's motion. It has said that quite clearly.
Mr De Domenico: All of them?
MR LAMONT: It has said it quite clearly. Mr De Domenico, you do not need to wave your hands in the air or stand up and carry on.
Mr De Domenico: I am not. I am not standing up. I know that it is difficult to know when I am and when I am not, but I am not in this case. But go on with your wonderful speech.
MR LAMONT: Thank you, Tony. It is a pleasure to be able to educate one of the Opposition. It is probably impossible to educate the rest. The proposition that we are pursuing includes consultation in relation to any other possible use for that site. The basis of that consultation is a discussion paper put out by the National Capital Planning Authority. That document was referred to by the Minister, Mr Wood, and the current Leader of the Opposition.
That will say to the Canberra community, "Here is a range of possibilities, but when you consider them you must bear in mind that the only definitive statement has been made by the Government and it says quite clearly that these things must go on the Acton Peninsula site". That is the only definitive statement that has been made, but the motion that Mr Moore is proposing is one of exclusivity.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .