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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 7 Hansard (25 June) . . Page.. 2129 ..

MR WOOD (continuing):

this town because we saw that as the most appropriate means and the most practical means, in difficult circumstances, of reducing petrol prices. Notwithstanding the criticism of the then Opposition, we went ahead with that. Unfortunately, it has taken at least two years, or probably a little more, for the new Government to recognise the sense of that policy, and now there are a couple of sites - I expect that they would be the same ones that we put up for tender - where stations are now being developed. I think Gull is going to come in and give some competition to Burmah, which has gone off the boil a little, and to other retailers in this town.

It has long been a disgrace - we have all agreed with this - that ACT petrol prices are as high as we see them. I expect that in the next fortnight or so, as holidays come on, the price will again shoot up to about the 80c a litre mark. That will be unfortunate. That high level will be due directly to the lethargy and the reluctance of this Government to accept the sensible policy that the ALP put in place some time ago. I think the ACT motorists should resent the extra money that has gone out of their pockets because of this delay. It may be that Woolworths will come in, and I was interested to hear Mr Humphries indicating support for that in principle. That, of course, is exactly the type of arrangement, although not specifically with Woolworths, that the former Government was all about. We can have cheaper petrol in this town. Belatedly, this Government is moving to carry on the policy. I hope that the ACT motorists start to pay at the bowser what they should be paying, and that is a good deal less than they do at the moment.

MR HUMPHRIES (Attorney-General and Minister for the Environment, Land and Planning) (5.50): Mr Speaker, I will comment on a couple of things in that segment of the debate. Ms McRae suggested that there has been a focus on Civic to the exclusion of other areas of the ACT. I suppose, Mr Speaker, that the Government in this area of planning has two responsibilities. One is to react to community proposals for development, whether they are individual leaseholders seeking to extend their house, put on a pergola, or something like that, or whether they are major national or international companies seeking major developments that will alter the landscape in a significant way. That is one job that the Government has in the planning sense. The other is to engage in a process of trying to pre-plan areas of the Territory which have sensitivity about them in such a way as to provide for the management of problems in the future, arising from development proposals, in a better way.

In the latter category, the Government has had a major agenda with respect to Civic. Civic has been a very important focus of our work in the last couple of years. In particular, the area out here, Civic Square, has been a very major focus for the Government. We see it as the Civic heart - the heart, in a sense, of the ACT community as a whole - yet it is looking very tired and run down. It is very old, even tatty. It is our determination that we give it some considerable new direction and life. That is why we have been very keen to focus a lot of effort on making Civic Square, the buildings around Civic Square, the entrances to Civic Square, and the whole structure of Civic work better than at the moment.

Other areas, though, have not been neglected in that process. Gungahlin has been an important focus for debate on planning issues. A lot of work has gone on in Gungahlin, Mr Speaker, and members will be aware of that. There also have been attempts to plan other areas of the city that have been subject to some sensitivity. Area B1, obviously,

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