Page 2307 - Week 08 - Tuesday, 17 August 1993
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
those committees participate - particularly the PDI Committee, which seems to have so many of the consultations going on all of the time - is sincere. Some people coming to a public hearing for the first time tend to approach it in a fairly cynical, tongue-in-cheek fashion and take a bit of convincing before they realise, understand and accept that we are not sitting there to rubber-stamp things but are in fact interested in hearing their comments. Their comments are taken note of, and in many cases their comments end up as part of our recommendations on the variation. I think it is important to take this opportunity to put that on record.
In relation to this particular variation, I would like to add to what Ms Szuty has said about the process. That includes the visits that we undertook to the golf course, the briefings that we received from the golf club committee members, from those involved at the club and from the developer. It also includes the time that was taken by the planning authorities in that process as well. Along with Mr Kaine, Ms Szuty, Mr Lamont and the other member of the committee, Mr De Domenico, I have every confidence that this report was in fact a very good result following an exhaustive process in which all of the concerns that were put by people were fairly heard, fairly balanced and considered very carefully by the committee. Along with the others, I join in commending this variation.
MR DE DOMENICO (8.30): I will be even briefer still, Madam Speaker, because everything that needs to be said has been said. I just want to say that the process that the PDI Committee goes through is perhaps a living example that we ought to be organising our government affairs a little bit more than we are now. That would prevent us from standing up in this house and attacking one another across the floor and playing politics. A lot of the people who presented evidence to this committee attempted to play politics. It is refreshing that members of all political parties realised that and said, "It is not going to work this time because we are here to make a logical decision based on fact and evidence, not to play politics".
I endorse what Mr Lamont said about people who at certain times make accusations about things that may or may not happen.
Mr Wood: We still hear them.
MR DE DOMENICO: Mr Wood quite rightly says that we still hear them on this and other developments. If people have some concrete evidence to put forward to any committee or any member of this Assembly, they ought to do that - in the words of the old idiom, they ought to put the old Bugs Bunny where their mouth is. But, if people persist in making accusations on hearsay and wasting the time of members of committees, I, for one, will not tolerate it. It has been said from time to time that perhaps I am slightly intolerant and a bit rude to people who appear before committees and say certain things, but people must realise that consultation does not necessarily mean agreement. It means consultation. No-one can say honestly that in this case, or in other cases before the PDI Committee, the community has not had adequate consultation. What happens after that is the Government's affair. Whether people have access to Ministers or not is something the Government has to look at; but, as far as committee members are concerned, the people have had adequate consultation.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .