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

None . . Page.. 655 ..

The important point is that we do not lose control of the national park; we do not relinquish it forever; we do not cede it to somebody else merely because we have somebody else manage it on our behalf. We still set the standards of management that we expect. We still decide how many people should be admitted to the park to view its beauty. We still decide what services should be offered at the park. We still manage the major questions about tourism, particularly ecotourism, at the park. We control all the important questions - every single last one of them - about the way in which the park is managed. But we do have the option of having somebody with a wealth of experience in this area do it on a better basis, on a higher quality basis and for less. That is the reason we need to look at this option.

I would urge members, therefore, not to consider a stupid move, a ridiculous move, and say, “No. We are putting down the shutters. We are closing our minds. We will blindfold ourselves and put corks in our ears. We are not considering this additional option”. That is what Mr Berry's motion talks about doing. That is stupid; that is stupidity. There is no basis for intelligent human beings to behave in that fashion, but that is what is being asked of us. Mr Speaker, I want to make it clear that the park will remain in public ownership and that the Government will continue to make it available to the people of the ACT.

Mr Speaker, there is another reason that Mr Berry's MPI deserves to be questioned very critically. Having said that we will keep it in public ownership, I acknowledge that there is a circumstance in which the ACT Government would hand over ownership of Namadgi National Park.

Ms McRae: For money.

MR HUMPHRIES: No, not for money. Mr Speaker, members who choose to be frivolous may be unaware that there is a process set up in this country for native title legislation to operate. It provides that indigenous peoples in this country may obtain ownership over land which was previously owned by the crown and it can produce in that circumstance ownership by them of assets which had previously been owned by the public through the crown. Therefore, it seems to me, Mr Speaker, that it is conceivable that land in the ACT could be subject to that process. Indeed, as we have said from the outset, the most eligible piece of land in the ACT that could be subject to that process is Namadgi National Park.

I, for one, say to the Assembly that I have no difficulties whatsoever in the Ngunnawal people of this region owning Namadgi National Park. We should therefore be prepared to acknowledge that as a possibility. We would hope that there would be appropriate conditions in that to make sure - - -

Mr Berry: It is hypothetical; but, if it happens, bring it back.

MR HUMPHRIES: Mr Speaker, I am being interjected on constantly in these remarks. I would ask for a little bit of order.

MR SPEAKER: There has been a considerable amount of interjection.

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