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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1995 Week 7 Hansard (17 October) . . Page.. 1724 ..

MR DE DOMENICO: I thank Ms Horodny for her question. As people probably would be aware, Ainslie Transfer Station is not cost effective in handling waste. That is point one. The facility costs approximately $210,000 to operate each year. Increased vandalism over the past 12 months would require a further $50,000 to be spent for continued use of the facility. The ACT community is heavily subsiding users of the Ainslie Transfer Station. About 12,600 vehicles per year visit the facility, which works out at a notional cost of $16.70 per visit just to cover the operational costs. Furthermore, the use of this facility decreased by nearly 25 per cent over the last two years. Even less use is expected as a result of the introduction of kerbside recycling and the provision of compost bins to ACT householders. North Canberra residents can no longer claim a geographical disadvantage in their distance from landfill sites. They will continue to have convenient access to the garden waste drop-off facility at Mitchell. The Ainslie Transfer Station will close on 31 October 1995, at the end of the current contracts. Savings gained from the closure of the Ainslie Transfer Station will be used to take forward the waste management strategy.

MS HORODNY: Could the Minister please answer my question? My question was specifically about the businesses operating there. Do you have an answer to that question?

MR DE DOMENICO: If there are any businesses operating there who would like to have discussions with the Government with a view to being located anywhere else, the Government, as always, would be delighted to talk to them.

Ms Horodny: I have a supplementary question, in that case. Given that the Government has just - - -

MR SPEAKER: Order! Ms Horodny, members are allowed to ask a question and a supplementary question.

Mr Moore: On a point of order, Mr Speaker: I think that what Ms Horodny did was draw attention to standing order 118 and the fact that the Minister had not answered the question. She is now asking her supplementary question. That seems to me to be in order.

MR SPEAKER: Is it the wish of the Assembly to allow Ms Horodny to ask this question as a supplementary question? There is no objection. That being the case, proceed, Ms Horodny.

MS HORODNY: Given that the Government has just offered $11/2m in subsidies to a large business, is the decision to close this small environmentally friendly business an indication of, firstly, the Government's commitment to small business, or, secondly, the Government's commitment to ESD?

MR DE DOMENICO: Mr Speaker, I am quite happy to answer the third or fourth question Ms Horodny has asked. She mentions the $1.5m and AOFR. Ms Horodny, that is going to create some 400 to 500 jobs. This Government will continue - - -

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