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

Canberra Times . . Page.. 246 ..

where that is the case, I think it is grossly unfair. On the one hand it is stupid to be conducting no further discussions with the Commonwealth based on an agreement we have signed and entered into. On the other hand it is insulting to the Government to expect that we should be willing to lie to the Assembly, which is what this motion implies.

Mr Speaker, I heard Ms Follett's standing order 46 explanation about urban development and about housing on Acton Peninsula. I say again that I believe that she is misrepresenting to the people of the ACT what her Government's intentions were. I read again the words that appear in the letter dated 11 June 1992. That letter is principally about the possibility of urban village development on Acton Peninsula. The first things that are mentioned in the letter are not the relocated QE2 home, are not the hospice, are not the rehabilitation and aged care services, some of which, by the way, never happened - - -

Mr Berry: The hospice did.

MR HUMPHRIES: “Some of which”, I said. Apart from the fact that those things come later in the letter, the thrust of the letter is about getting the Federal Government to allow the ACT to start building housing on that site. It states:

It is the ACT Government's belief that the Peninsula area presents an unparalleled opportunity in the long term for the development of an urban village, based on a mix of medium and high density housing with ancillary commercial and tourist facilities.

So, there was not to be just housing but presumably shops or boutiques on the site - - -

Ms Follett: Galleries.

MR HUMPHRIES: Galleries, maybe a hotel - who knows? The letter goes on to state:

The urban village concept would have as a principal objective the retention of significant areas of the Peninsula for recreational use by the people of Canberra.

It is true that the former Chief Minister mentions QE2, the hospice, the rehabilitation and aged care services, and recreational areas; but it is also painfully clear that she intended that there should be medium- to high-density dwellings on that peninsula. That, Mr Speaker, is the basis of the former Chief Minister's claim that this site is worth $45m. She well knows that it would not be worth anything of that kind to the ACT, or to anyone else for that matter, if it were not for the fact that medium-density or high-density housing was to go on that site. I quote her comments to the Canberra Times on 19 October 1994:

We certainly will be pursuing it, a land swap with the Commonwealth ... They won't get the site for nothing.

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