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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 3 Hansard (8 April) . . Page.. 669 ..

MR MOORE (continuing):

I had suggested that it would be appropriate, in section 2 of the Schedule to the legislation, "Appointment and terms of office", to add that this should be done in accordance with the Statutory Appointments Act 1994. Mr Kaine's office assures me, and his staff have assured me, that the legislation comes under the Statutory Appointments Act and therefore it is not necessary to put in an amendment to clarify that. I have accepted that at this point; but, along with other members, I will be monitoring how often the Statutory Appointments Act has been breached.

I know that it has been breached on a number of occasions. Perhaps that is because such things do not appear in the various Acts, so in fact there is not a reminder in the Acts that these appointments are made by statutory appointment. However, rather than doing it in just this one Act, it may be more appropriate for us to go back and ask the Government to do a review of all the Acts and at one hit put into each of the Acts that such appointments must be made in accordance with the Statutory Appointments Act 1994. I accept that such appointments will be made accordingly, so I will not be moving that amendment; but it might be worth while flagging that a review of that area is possible in the foreseeable future.

MR KAINE (Minister for Urban Services and Minister for Tourism) (11.58): Mr Speaker, I must say that I am encouraged by the general support this legislation has been given today. I know that there are reservations in some connections, and I will come to those in a moment. I believe that we have an important piece of legislation that recognises the changed approach that has become necessary and to which Mr Wood has referred. The old ways of encouraging people to come to Canberra and managing this business of tourism from the Government viewpoint have been fairly successful, but there is a need to beef up that performance. It is one of the few industries we have, and we have reached the stage where we have to take a different approach to ensure the success of our tourism operations in the future. This is by no means the sole solution to the problem. Mr Corbell says that this will not fix it; I agree with him. It will not of itself fix anything; but it is another piece that is being put into place to change the way we approach the business of tourism and, hopefully, to get some beneficial results in the future.

I believe that the Bill, when passed, as I expect it will be today, given the expressions of support so far, will play a significant role in ensuring that the Capital Territory is enhanced as an important tourist destination for interstate and international travellers. With a corporation operating in a more commercial framework than is currently possible and as an identifiable and marketable entity, the intention is to attract greater private sector investment in the marketing of the ACT. Up until now it has been accepted, I think, that it is the Government's responsibility to finance the marketing of Canberra. I think that can be argued, because at the end of the day it is not the Government that benefits.

There is no direct tax that comes to the Government because the number of tourists coming into Canberra increases; there are indirect benefits that flow in many ways. There is no direct benefit to the Government when there is a quantum increase in the number of tourists that come to Canberra; but there is a quantum increase in the inputs into the business community out there, and not only those directly involved with the

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