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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1996 Week 3 Hansard (27 March) . . Page.. 734 ..

MR WOOD (continuing):

I had a number of approaches in the time that I was Minister to allow power craft other than electric or steam on our lakes, and each time I said "No" because that "No" was absolutely in accord with what the ACT community has said over a long period. Any time there is a proposal for a powerboat event on Lake Burley Griffin, even for one day or one afternoon, there is an outcry. I think tolerance is given to allow waterskiing on Lake Burley Griffin on one day a year. The evidence is clear over many years, and I am surprised that the Minister has not heard that.

In relation to this issue, I subscribe somewhat - I do not usually do this - to a conspiracy theory. I do not think it was ever intended that jet skis would go on Lake Tuggeranong. The proposal just did not add up. The area set aside was altogether too small. You could not have any reasonable amount of activity in that area. The costs did not seem to me to add up. They were happy to charge up to $40 for a quarter of an hour and there were six jet skis. I could not see, in my admittedly fairly brief costing of the project, that it was going to make money. I believe that it was an attempt to get powerboats onto our waterways. That is what it was about. I would not be surprised if there was a knowledge that this application would fail and that the proponent would say, "Okay, folks, be nice to us; we have to have it somewhere. Can we go onto the Cotter", as I have heard the proponent now saying, "or Googong?", and that appears to be eminently reasonable. I do not think it was ever a serious proposal. It was never going to work. It is as simple as that. So why was it done?

I am also bemused, and confused as well, about the support clearly given, though not full on, by the Liberal Party. The president of the party in that area seemed to be supporting at least a trial, and it was against the whole tactic of this Minister in the time that he has been Minister. Mr Humphries has not taken any decision in 15 months that is likely to attract criticism. He has told people, "Go and talk to Mr Moore; go and talk to Mr Wood. If you get agreement we might run this". He has set out not to create controversy. Yet, he took on this proposal and said, "Let us have a trial". That surprised me. It was out of character with the Minister. These facts, to me, all add up. I think a refusal was expected and now the campaign is coming in to say, "Well, let us go out to Googong or somewhere on the Cotter. Let us use one of our lakes". Of course, it is no more suitable to use those than it is to use Lake Tuggeranong. Perhaps it is less suitable because the other areas hold our drinking water supply. My argument would be the same. It is "No" to Lake Tuggeranong, as would be expected, and it is "No" to use on our other waterways.

Various individuals and various bodies have made approaches over the years. The Minister might come back one day and tell me how many claims have been made to use these other waters for power craft. Each time the answer to them has been "No", and that must be the answer again on this occasion. We will protect Lake Tuggeranong, but we will also protect from power craft every other waterway that exists in the ACT. Let us protect them all. Let us make it very clear that we will not allow those power craft, and I exclude the two types that I mentioned before. We will protect our waterways from those power craft. I think the Minister should take the lead in doing that, and I think it is disgraceful that he has not done so to date.

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