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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 5 Hansard (14 May) . . Page.. 1443 ..

MR CORBELL (continuing):

At the moment this Government has only three options, and it says to the community, "These are the three options we will consult with you about. No others will be entered into. We will not listen to them in any way". That is completely unacceptable.

In my media release I also said that the ALP wants to make sure that all members of the community are genuinely consulted about this proposal - that is, John Dedman Parkway - and that all issues, including the development and maintenance of a strong, viable and responsive public transport system, are considered. We also want to make sure that other alternatives, such as the options for John Dedman Parkway developed by the Lyneham and O'Connor Residents Association, are considered. That is what we are here about. I want to place on the record that it is this Government that is seriously considering building a road through one of the last remaining significant areas of dry sclerophyll forest in Canberra.

Mr Humphries: It is not doing anything of the sort. That is nonsense.

MR CORBELL: The Minister says it is nonsense. It is not nonsense. The Joint Parliamentary Committee on the National Capital recommended that the area be given legislative protection because of its significance environmentally, culturally, and as part of the plan of the ACT. This Government seems to be willing to ignore that. Planning authorities, I must say, from time to time, also appear to be willing to ignore those recommendations, but they have been around for over a decade; I would suggest, closer to two decades. Yet we still maintain this blinkered approach that says that we can build a road through that significant area of bushland in the Inner North. We will not accept those proposals.

MR SPEAKER: Order! The member's time has expired.

MS TUCKER (6.00): I want to make a brief comment about Mr Hird's question to Ms Horodny in question time today. I guess he thought it was funny, but it is actually quite disturbing. Either he has completely missed the point of the censure motion yesterday or, if he has not, he has no respect for the people of the SWOW community who donated thousands of hours of their time to what they thought was a genuine consultation process; to what they thought would lead to results which would be acceptable to the Government and to the SWOW community. That is about deception. It has nothing to do with Ms Horodny's campaign to ban battery hens. That was an election issue. We were voted in on those sorts of issues. For Mr Hird to suggest that there is a similarity between what people get into this place on, or do not get into this place on, and the deceptive farce that occurred with Mr Stefaniak on the consultation process on the School Without Walls was extremely disrespectful and showed a misunderstanding of the issue.

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