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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1995 Week 8 Hansard (24 October) . . Page.. 1938 ..

MRS CARNELL (continuing):

HIV AIDS education. Obviously, the ACT Government sees hepatitis C as a very real problem for the future. Interferon treatment has not yet been fully proven as being effective, but we are working with the Commonwealth Government to ensure that in the future a treatment plan is available in the ACT.

Ms Follett: When can I get my briefing?

MRS CARNELL: Any time you like.

MS TUCKER: My question is to Mr Humphries as Minister for Planning. Mr Humphries, last week I asked you a question about the LAPACs and the amount of time that you have given them to respond to variation 33. I noticed that in your response you said that you thought it was adequate time for them to begin to respond to this variation. You also said that you believed that they had a responsibility to develop awareness guidelines. That group, at the first and only meeting they have had, did not even know each other's names. Some of the members of that LAPAC were saying, "What is this variation and what is the moratorium?". That group had not enough time to even have another meeting and asked for an extension of time to give in their submissions. I would like to know how you think they can possibly develop awareness guidelines, or what you think awareness guidelines are. Before they are developed, how can they come up with a thoughtful response to variation 33?

MR HUMPHRIES: Mr Speaker, I think Ms Tucker is confusing two things. I asked for consideration by the LAPACs fairly rapidly of draft variation 33. I did not require them also to develop awareness guidelines within the same timeframe. They have as much time as they want to develop awareness guidelines. They can take a year if they want to. It will not be much good for people in their communities, I must say, if they take that long; but there is no time limit on that aspect of it.

Mr Speaker, as I said in my previous answer on this matter, it is of concern that a great many planning processes have been held up while we have waited for the establishment of local area planning, and, now, the consideration of draft variation 33 through that process. I do not apologise for being concerned that we get the draft variation up before the LAPACs and into the Assembly at the first available opportunity. The committee sought a two-week extension. As I indicated to the Assembly, I was happy to grant the two-week extension. Nobody has written to me, that I am aware of at this stage, to say, "We do not consider that the two weeks is adequate". I assume that if they did write to me in those terms it would not be the view of the whole of the committee which has already asked for a two-week extension and no more.

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