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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1999 Week 8 Hansard (25 August) . . Page.. 2443 ..

MS CARNELL (continuing):

The Authority was however concerned that, if the National Museum of Australia proceeds on Acton Peninsula, the associated construction activity would create an environment that may not be compatible with a hospice and requested that you be advised of this concern.

Mr Moore: Is that the whole letter?

MS CARNELL: That is the whole letter. That is not out of context. Mr Speaker, there is any amount of other documentation to show that the Labor Party knew categorically, definitely, that it was a temporary facility. When I was negotiating with the Commonwealth for the retention of the ACT Hospice on Acton Peninsula, I was fighting a very difficult battle, because the Commonwealth was able to show me documents such as that letter that showed that when we got approval to go onto Acton it was for no more than five years, full stop. We may have been given - - -

Mr Berry: No, that's not true.

MS CARNELL: It is.

Mr Berry: The letter does not say that.

MS CARNELL: It does say that. It is categorical that it says that. Of course there were other documents, and I am sure that those opposite must have them as part of the FOI request, so they know what actually happened. They know that Paul Keating did announce in his cultural statement that they were going to put a national facility on Acton Peninsula. They knew already that the view of the National Capital Planning Authority at the time was that a hospice may not be compatible with that sort of development. That is exactly what it says in the letter.

Faced with that sort of negotiation, obviously I said, "I understand that but it was not us; it was the other silly mob. They went ahead. We are faced with the dilemma now that we have a wonderful facility on a great site, wonderful facility that cost the taxpayers of the ACT a lot of money. Therefore, we should be allowed to keep it". They said, "But, Chief Minister, you would agree, would you not, that the Government , whichever side it might have been, spent taxpayers' money knowing that you had a temporary facility?". Even the works approval said "proposed temporary hospice". Not "temporary works approval" but "temporary hospice" was all the way through the documentation.

They said, "If it was clear to the ACT government of the time that it was a temporary facility for not more than five years, you really cannot expect the Government now to compensate you for going ahead when you knew exactly what the rules were". I said, "It was not me; it was them". They said, "Excuse me, it also was not the current government; it was the previous Labor government. The previous Labor government here and the previous Labor government Federally gave approval for a temporary facility for not more than five years on Acton Peninsula, with information that if the museum went ahead on Acton Peninsula it may not be regarded as appropriate to keep a hospice on the site". There is no doubt. That is reality.

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