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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1996 Week 13 Hansard (5 December) . . Page.. 4487 ..

MR STEFANIAK (continuing):

The main issue was the parking, and that has been addressed. I think it is time now to get on with this project. I think it will have immense benefits for the Territory as well as for the residents of Belconnen. I commend the Belconnen Soccer Club for its initiative. I also commend my colleague the Minister for his detailed analysis of this, which has brought us to this point on what will be, I think, a most valuable resource for the whole Canberra community.

MR HUMPHRIES (Attorney-General and Minister for the Environment, Land and Planning) (4.36), in reply: Mr Speaker, I am very grateful to members for their comments on this matter, and they will be of assistance in making a decision next week. Most members have been supportive of the issuing of the lease, but Ms Horodny has been critical of that proposed decision. I will look at the issues raised, particularly by Ms Horodny, before making a decision. I should indicate to her that a number of issues need to be examined carefully. This is not a decision which is all black and no white, or all white and no black, depending on your point of view. I do not think any decision which appears to be straightforward is one that is likely to engage debate on the floor of this Assembly on any occasion, and this is no exception.

Mr Wood: Mr Stefaniak has made the decision for you.

Mr Stefaniak: I just support going ahead, Bill. It is fairly simple.

MR HUMPHRIES: Mr Stefaniak has been very forthright in his support. I think it is interesting to note, Mr Speaker, that the members for Ginninderra have not been afraid to speak in this debate. There is a cost to be carried by them if the proposals are approved by the Government, and I appreciate the forthrightness of those members on both sides of the house.

I want to make one brief response to one of Ms Horodny's comments. The suggestion, essentially, was that being a Planning Minister means that on occasions such as this I cannot be Environment Minister. I find that a very odd suggestion. It could equally be said that if I am the Environment Minister I cannot really be the Planning Minister; that my Environment Minister's hat would somehow displace my Planning Minister's hat and it would mean that I would not approve an application such as this. The whole point, Mr Speaker, of every government in the Assembly, I think, having given the planning and environment portfolio to the same person is that you can integrate issues of planning and development with issues of management of the environment. That is the approach that the Government intends to take on this issue as well - not to approve development for the sake of it if that comes at the expense of the environment, and that will be a very critical issue in this decision. I can advise members that, having taken the comments on board, I will be in a position to advise the Assembly next week of a decision on this matter.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

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