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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 7 Hansard (24 June) . . Page.. 1956 ..

Mr Humphries: On a point of order, Mr Speaker: Standing order 117(c)(ii) indicates that Ministers should not be asked to announce Government policy. Mr Whitecross has asked Mr Stefaniak whether he intends to support the proposal. As yet, that has not been decided or, if it has been decided, it is Government policy which cannot be announced, pursuant to that standing order.

MR SPEAKER: If that is correct, and I am not in a position to comment on that - Mr Stefaniak, you must be aware of that standing order - if there is anything else in Mr Whitecross's question that can be answered, I would ask you to proceed with that.

MR STEFANIAK: Mr Speaker, I think Mr Whitecross is referring to the Strategic Review of Pools and Related Facilities in the ACT. In fact, I think it is looking at the next 20 years. As members might be aware, last year the Government commissioned the Strategic Review of Pools and Related Facilities in the ACT. Mr Whitecross, the report was released to the community for public comment on 4 July this year.

Mr Whitecross: On 4 July?

MR STEFANIAK: I am sorry; on 4 April. The 4th of July is American Independence Day. People are commenting on that report. The cut-off date for people to comment is the end of the month. I understand that quite a few comments have been made already.

That report was released to the community on 4 April, with the specific intention of gaining wider comment. It contains a large number of recommendations for consideration over the next 10-plus years. One of the recommendations was that the Government should consider upgrading the Civic pool and that, at some stage, the Dickson pool should close. I have received a lot of comments in relation to that, Mr Whitecross, naturally enough; but I can say this: This Government has no intention of closing the Dickson pool. Also, the report and the views expressed therein are the consultant's, and the consultant's only, and not necessarily those of the Government.

The report recommends expenditure of well over $50m. I think, realistically, that it would be very difficult for any government to accept all of those recommendations. It is a review only. It is a review that was conducted by a company, the selection process for which, I think, the Auditor-General has commented on already and given a big tick in the box. It is a review on which a lot of members of the community are now making very valuable input to this Government, certainly in terms of their suggestions on the recommendations and the views expressed in that particular report. That will be very useful for this Government, and indeed for any future government, as it considers Canberra's aquatic needs for the next 10, 15 or 20 years.

But the report is only the views of the consultant. I can certainly reassure people here - indeed, I have been doing so - about the suggestions it makes in relation to Dickson. I might inform members that the current contractor there has a contract up until 2002, with an option to extend for a further five years after that. That is simply a fact. The review only expresses some opinions of the consultant. I look forward to seeing all the various comments that people make, and I thank those members of the public who have to date made comments on this particular report.

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