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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1996 Week 14 Hansard (10 December) . . Page.. 4639 ..

MS McRAE (continuing):

of Canberra and, without their commitment, their partnership, their signing off to this, all of this is one big waste of time. I think that the Assembly should not be insulted in this way. We should get back a proper report which involves the Commonwealth, which commits the Commonwealth, which shows us how that commitment is there, and we should get some better analysis of what the community really called for, which was much more focused in this report, and with some better analysis and feedback on that. I commend my amendment to the Assembly.

MR MOORE: Mr Speaker, I wonder whether I might make a personal explanation under standing order 46.

MR SPEAKER: Proceed.

MR MOORE: It is a very unusual thing for me to do, Mr Speaker. In an interjection across the floor earlier, after I had commented that the Planning and Environment Committee had warned what would come out of the draft that we had seen, Mrs Carnell said that Mr Kaine had told her that there was no resolution. Indeed, that is correct. Mr Kaine is always accurate on these things. But, Mr Speaker, we had told the officers who briefed us, in no uncertain detail - some members wrote copious notes on the draft that we had - that there were major problems with this. I am not debating this. That is the sense in which I said that they had been warned. We had not only told the people who had briefed us; there were notes as well to support that. Mr Kaine is correct; there was no formal resolution of the committee; but the process was there, Mr Speaker.

MRS CARNELL (Chief Minister) (4.52): Mr Speaker, I have to admit that I am happy to have this Assembly state that the Liberal Party is the only political group in this Assembly that is willing to grapple with the major issues facing Canberra - that is, jobs and economic development in this place. If that is what this Assembly wants to say, that is fine. That is fine with this side of the house. We will continue to go down the path of making sure that we do grapple with the major issues that face this Assembly.

Mr Speaker, I will try to address some of the issues that have been raised. Ms Horodny made the point that somehow we had not gone down an appropriate consultation path. Ms Horodny obviously has not read any of the documents that go with this approach. For the interest of the Assembly, I am happy to table the initial document that went out as the basis of the consultation approach. I will read some of the contents. It is setting the scene. What is a strategic plan? Why do we need a strategic plan? How long are we planning for? Who is preparing the plan? What do we value about the ACT, the vision and so on? What factors shape the ACT, and so on - all of the issues involved? What will be the look and feel of Canberra in the future under the current economic trends? It runs all the way through that. Then it tells us who the project personnel are and the approach that will be taken. This was the document, Mr Speaker - I will table it for the interest of at least the Greens - that went out as part of the initial process.

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