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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 13 Hansard (4 December) . . Page.. 4553 ..

MR STEFANIAK (continuing):

I went there between 2 and 3 o'clock. There were seven races. I barely heard one of them, which I heard for 90 seconds. A couple of others I could just discern. Two of them were drowned out when the birds in a tree started tweeting, and a couple of aircraft flying over during the other ones quite clearly drowned out any noise there was. There were a couple of races I could not hear - and I have pretty reasonable hearing.

What the Government has proposed is a very reasonable compromise which has been developed over many years to resolve a difficult problem. I think it is unreasonable, and indeed selfish, for people to want a lower level of noise. A lot has been done to improve sound problems at Fairbairn Park. The motor sport community has done a hell of a lot in that regard. Improvements have been made and we now have a sensible regulation. The limit is lower than some that apply in various parts of New South Wales. I accept that there is complex legislation in that State, but again I hark back to Fraser Park and other sites. I think we have a very fair piece of legislation. It is going to be hard for motor sport to comply with that at all times. It imposes restrictions on them, but to restrict noise levels further would be totally unreasonable and would be doing a great disservice to the many thousands of men, women and children in Canberra and the region who get a lot of enjoyment out of this legitimate sporting activity.

MR CORBELL (11.40): Mr Speaker, I move:

Omit all words after "omitting", substitute "Item 10 of Table 2 in Schedule 2 at page 27.".

The amendment the Labor Party is moving today proposes a law in relation to motor sport in the Territory which is consistent across the Territory. We are proposing that item 10 of Table 2 in the Schedule be deleted. We are proposing that there be no specific regulation for Fairbairn Park. There is a basic reason why we are proposing this. We are proposing it because motor sport activities should be authorised and dealt with under the environment protection law in the same way right across the ACT. We should not have one law for Fairbairn Park and one law for motor sport activities in the rest of the Territory. It is unreasonable to expect people like the Canberra Kart Racing Club to undertake a certain activity at Fairbairn Park and work under a different regime from a regime they would have to work under if they were conducting an activity elsewhere in the Territory outside of Fairbairn Park.

The major argument that has been put to the Labor Party in relation to the regulation of Fairbairn Park is that it treats the residents of New South Wales differently from the way it treats residents of the ACT. What we are proposing is that motor sport activity across the ACT be treated in a consistent fashion. If our amendment were successful, all motor sport activity would apply for an environmental authorisation, a licence to pollute, and that would be dealt with by the Environment Management Authority, which would grant authorisation with whatever conditions it believed appropriate for an event or series of events. A resident in New South Wales or the ACT concerned about that grant of an environmental authorisation could appeal against it or part of it in the AAT. Equally, if representatives of certain motor sporting activities believe a decision by the EMA is unjust, they also can go to the AAT. That is a consistent approach to the authorisation of motor sport activity in the Territory. What the Government is proposing with their regulation is not a consistent approach.

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