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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 5 Hansard (14 May) . . Page.. 1444 ..

Mr Humphries: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I think that even in the adjournment debate the standing orders prevent people from reflecting on a vote of the Assembly, and I think that is what Ms Tucker is doing.

MR SPEAKER: I uphold the point of order.

MS TUCKER: I have finished.

MR HUMPHRIES (Attorney-General) (6.01), in reply: I would seek an extension of time, except that I cannot have one, of course.

Ms McRae: No. Thank goodness for that.

MR HUMPHRIES: Yes, I am sure you are grateful for that, Ms McRae. First of all, on the issue Ms McRae raised, I want to table - I would have tabled it if we had had the debate today - a very rough first draft of a consultation protocol. This has been presented to me by my department. I think it needs a lot more work, to be quite frank; but that is what the department has produced, and I table it for members' interest. I am sure we will come back to debate this later. We have to develop the sorts of protocols Ms McRae referred to.

I am not so pessimistic about the National Museum. I think the fact that $7m is to be spent on work in this financial year is a greater commitment than was ever made before by previous governments, particularly by the Keating Government, which frequently said, "It is just around the corner, mate", and it never turned up. I think at the time of the next Federal election we will all be eating our words, or those over there will be eating their words, about a museum. I certainly think that is going to be the case.

I have noted Mr Berry's reading of Ms Stanley's letter on Gold Creek Village. I have had several dealings with Ms Stanley. Ms Stanley's basic contention is that the Government should not authorise further building work to go on at Gold Creek, at Federation Square, which would have the effect of attracting people to that site. Ms Stanley seems to believe that creating additional facilities, mostly additional non-retail facilities, at that site would be bad for the existing traders there. I have made it clear to her that I will do everything I can to help the traders, but stopping further development there of a kind which will bring people to her site is foolish. It is stupid. Ms Stanley does not seem to believe that that has anything to do with it. She has opposed the very means whereby her business might have been saved. I have to say that I have no sympathy whatsoever for her position.

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