Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .
Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1999 Week 9 Hansard (31 August) . . Page.. 2587 ..
MR STANHOPE: The Chief Minister says it again. They said that no such claims had ever been made. I seek leave to table the CTEC press release of 15 July.
Leave granted.
Ms Carnell: That is true.
MR STANHOPE: The Chief Minister now says it is true.
Ms Carnell: No, they are two different things.
MR STANHOPE: We flip and we flop from one view to the other. As soon as we are found out we just say, "Yes, that is true". Five minutes ago it was not true. Now it is true.
MR SPEAKER: Order! You are not now saying how you were misquoted.
MR STANHOPE: I just want to point out that the CTEC press release of 15 July states explicitly that the number of spectators expected is 70,000. It also states that the employment impact will be 197 full- or part-time equivalent jobs, and it also states that the economic impact will be $5.34m over each year. The latest CTEC information is that the number of spectators expected is 50,000 - that has dropped by 20,000 - and that the employment impact will be 150 full- or part-time equivalents. The number of spectators dropped overnight by 20,000, the employment impact dropped from 197 full- or part-time equivalents to 150 full- or part-time equivalents. The net economic benefit changed from $5.34m a year to $51m over five years. It is extremely worrying that I got interjections from the Chief Minister, the Deputy Chief Minister and the Minister for Health that I was not speaking the truth. They simply do not understand the basis of this proposal. This is how we got into strife with Bruce Stadium. That is the point we were making. You do not even understand your own figures.
MR SPEAKER: Resume your seat, Mr Stanhope. You have finished your standing order 47 explanation.
MS CARNELL (Chief Minister): Mr Speaker, I ask for leave to make a statement under the same standing order.
MR SPEAKER: Proceed.
MS CARNELL
: The person who obviously does not understand this issue is Mr Stanhope. As I said when I got up to speak, if Mr Stanhope had been listening, the figures that we used for the business case, for the operating statement, for the information that was distributed to members, were very conservative figures. We did that, as I said before, because CTEC did not want to overestimate or go even to the middle of the range of the people we expected. CTEC went in, as I explained, at the conservative end of visitors. I had assumed that that is what those opposite would have wanted us to do. There are two different issues, Mr Speaker. The conservative figures
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .