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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 12 Hansard (13 November) . . Page.. 4079 ..

Ms McRae: You have not even heard what we are going to say.

MS TUCKER: Ms McRae says that we have not heard her position. I acknowledge that. I thought that I had heard it; but, if it is different from what I thought I heard, then I will be happy to retract this. Dr Garth has done a survey. He received 700 responses. (Extension of time granted) What he says in this article is:

I call on Planning Minister Gary Humphries to review the proposed redevelopment and demand a reduction in the amount of retail and commercial space being developed.

This reduction will mean less traffic and fewer parking problems and will ensure that we are not adding to the woes of existing small businesses by creating retail space in a market where there are already high vacancy rates. Gary Humphries must give the community the development we want rather than the Minister's preferred option.

In July I letterboxed more than 5,500 houses in the suburbs of Griffith, Kingston, Red Hill, Narrabundah, Barton and Forrest with a survey about the proposed development. I received more than 700 responses, which shows how strongly the local residents feel about this issue. The final results of the survey were that 19 percent wanted no development at all, 39 percent were in favour of the proposed development, and 44 percent want only a partial development ...

That means that 63 per cent were not happy with the current proposal. Basically, what Dr Garth was saying was what we are saying - that the scale of this project is what is worrying people. It is not that people are necessarily trying to stop the development; but they are genuinely concerned. They are passionately concerned about their place. Their place, that has a lot of meaning to them, is going to be altered irrevocably and it is not something that they have had a part in. Yet, if they had been given an opportunity, you would still be getting development there; you would still be getting investment; but it would be appropriate.

MR HUMPHRIES (Attorney-General and Minister for the Environment, Land and Planning) (11.44): Mr Speaker, today, the Assembly comes to make a decision on a matter which has been before the Government, the Assembly generally, I suppose, and the community for well over 12 months. It has been a major debate on an issue of great significance, particularly for those living in South Canberra. I believe, and I hope that the Assembly believes, that we have come to the point where we need to make a decision on this development.

Mr Speaker, there have been claims that not enough consultation has occurred or that the right sort of consultation has not occurred. I have to say that I think that, if we needed to engage in any more consultation on the issue of the Manuka car park, we would be taking dogs and cats in South Canberra into our care and interrogating them on what they think about this development. It has been more extensively consulted about than any other proposal I can think of in my nine years here in the Legislative Assembly. It has been subject to extensive consultation - - -

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