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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 3 Hansard (8 April) . . Page.. 708 ..

MRS CARNELL (continuing):

If we believe the Canberra/Nara Sister City Committee should represent the community on issues like this - and certainly the previous Government did, and we believe it should - then I feel very strongly that this Assembly should support the Canberra/Nara Sister City Committee in their views that the Canberra/Nara Peace Park is an appropriate name; but, most importantly, that these things should be determined at a local level between the people of Canberra and the people of Nara - not by the RSL, not by the Prime Minister, but by the people of Canberra. That is what has happened.

As I have spelt out, this consultation process went on for a very long time. It started off in 1995 with my making a statement in this house. It went to the Interim Kingston Foreshore Development Authority; it went to the NCA; it was in the Canberra Times in 1996. On 14 February 1997 the Planning and Environment Committee looked at it as a peace park, very definitely. I believe very strongly that we, as an Assembly, must say that we will listen to the people of Canberra; we will listen to people who live in and who love this city, not outsiders. That is what this is all about.

MS McRAE (4.07): If ever there was a disaster that could have been foreseen and dealt with, this was one. We have now heard Mrs Carnell's definition of community consultation. It is making a statement in the chamber, having some random article appear in the Canberra Times, talking to the NCA, talking to the Interim Kingston Foreshore Development Authority and popping something into the Planning and Environment Committee. I do not think that adds up to the same idea of community consultation as anybody else holds. Therein lies the nub of this problem. It seems that this Government, by its action, has hit a brick wall. It cannot accept that there may be impediments to anything that it wants to single-handedly do.

This whole sorry saga is a cogent and sad commentary on a failure of leadership. What we require from our leaders is some clear thinking, some anticipatory thinking, on problems that they are likely to encounter and how they will deal with those problems. It is of absolutely no use hiding behind a random committee or anyone else. Our leaders need to think through the consequence of this action, whom it is going to affect and how they can deal with the possible downsides of it. This is where there has been no action taken in anticipation.

The messages were loud and clear that anything that was going to be put by the lake was going to meet with strong disapproval; it did not matter what it was. The futsal slab raised an enormous storm of protest. What was the protest about? It was about the fact that no-one, but no-one, had heard of the fact that it was going to happen there until it happened. Sure enough, the NCA had been spoken to. Perhaps there had been an article in the Canberra Times, although I did not see it. Mrs Carnell may well have made a statement about it, and maybe even the Kingston foreshore committee might have heard about the futsal slab. But the people of Canberra did not. Therein already lies the first signal - the fact that this was going to cause a problem. It does not matter what it is, the lesson is there.

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