Page 71 - Week 01 - Tuesday, 22 February 1994
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Should the outcome be unfavourable, demonstrating considerable economic disadvantage to the Government, or should the outcome demonstrate only marginal advantage to the Government over proceeding with a similar greenfields development in Gungahlin, I will oppose the draft variation and move to disallow it.
I do not think I will comment extensively on the issues that the other speakers in this debate have raised. Mr Lamont set out very eloquently the issues which the Planning Committee has considered in its report. These comprise a very substantial component of the report. Mr Kaine this evening has addressed each of the recommendations and outlined the committee's views in regard to them. I will leave the remainder of my remarks until the independent economic analysis has been tabled by the Minister for the Environment, Land and Planning, and we all, as Assembly members, have had the opportunity to comment on it.
MR DE DOMENICO (9.18): Very briefly, Madam Speaker, Mr Kaine, I think, put it succinctly. The only outstanding issue as far as most members of the committee were concerned was whether we accept holus-bolus what was said by the Department of the Environment, Land and Planning or whether we accept holus-bolus the criticisms presented by the people from North Watson. It was very difficult not to be very sympathetic with the arguments put forward by the North Watson people, mainly because of the fact that here we have a small community organisation, not able to draw on the enormous resources of the Department of the Environment, Land and Planning, putting forward very plausible arguments.
As Mr Kaine and Mr Lamont said, I think this is the variation that makes this Assembly come of age, and perhaps our committee come of age. We did really have to think long and hard. Once again the only issue, as far as I am concerned, that remains to be resolved is whether there are economic advantages - I stress the words "economic advantages" - not considerable or less considerable or minute advantages as Ms Szuty wanted to say in her remarks. I understand that the analysis being done by Access Economics also is taking into account social costs. In any economic analysis you have to take social costs into account. When we talk about economic advantages to the Government, that is what we really mean. Are there any economic advantages to the community in the North Watson variation? I think all of us ought to be supporting anything that is of economic advantage to the community, because it also takes into account the social aspects. It was a very easy decision for the committee; all we need do is to make sure that the most important issue still outstanding is resolved.
I welcome the fact that all members of this Assembly tend to agree that Access Economics is an organisation which we can accept as impartial in terms of the professional work that they do, notwithstanding whether they costed Fightback or anything else. If nothing else, Access Economics and similar organisations do a professional job. I also applaud the Minister for taking on board the recommendations of the committee and commissioning an economic analysis. I look forward to what it has to say. Like Mr Kaine, Mr Lamont, and others on the committee, and members of this Assembly, I think that, should that report say that there are economic advantages to the ACT community, it behoves us all to support the variation.
Question resolved in the affirmative.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .