Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .
Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2000 Week 1 Hansard (16 February) . . Page.. 152 ..
MR QUINLAN (continuing):
were on holidays, I wonder when those discussions took place and when the decision not to hold CHOGM in Canberra was really made. I remain intrigued with regard to that.
The Chief Minister has quite reasonably brought forward an amendment which calls for some improvements to Canberra which might enhance our capacity to host a CHOGM. There will shortly be circulated in my name a proposed amendment to that amendment which calls upon John Howard to work within CHOGM to reduce the size of CHOGM, which seems to have become bigger than the Olympic Games, so that more than a few Commonwealth countries can host CHOGM. It seems ridiculous that an organisation the size of the Commonwealth would have a Heads of Government Meeting that could not be accommodated in a city as well appointed as Canberra.
Mr Howard should do that not just in the interests of Canberra but in the interests of many other Commonwealth countries. Fiji, Kiribati, St Lucia, Tonga, Western Samoa and so many of the Commonwealth countries must not have anywhere near the facilities that are available in Canberra. Part of the problem is the size of CHOGM itself. I will add to those countries New Zealand. Wellington has a population of about 300,000. What Mr Howard needs to do, if he is positive about this at all and if we want to be positive about this, is to move within CHOGM to reduce the size of the thing to a reasonable magnitude so that it truly can be a meeting of Commonwealth heads hosted by as many Commonwealth countries as possible.
I support Mr Stanhope's motion. Mr Stanhope made the very valid point that, worse than not getting CHOGM, for arguably political capital we were given CHOGM and had it taken away. As Mr Stanhope said, that has damaged and will damage our reputation, and it has damaged and will damage our status and our standing. Therefore, all members of this Assembly who have Canberra at heart should support this motion.
MR SPEAKER: Move your amendment, Mr Quinlan, please.
MR QUINLAN: I move:
After proposed paragraph (b) insert the following new paragraph:
"(ba) working within the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting to rationalise the magnitude of future meetings to ensure that they are capable of being hosted by more Commonwealth nations than would be the case at present.".
MR HUMPHRIES
(Treasurer, Attorney-General and Minister for Justice and Community Safety) (11.21): Mr Speaker, it is a matter of regret that the Assembly needs to take the step today of considering a motion of this kind on an issue that is quite fundamental to our image as a city and our reputation as a place that can do business and, in particular, can host important meetings in an efficient and effective way. This problem would not have been anything like as severe, of course, had the decision been made originally some time ago to host CHOGM in some other place, in Brisbane, Adelaide or somewhere else. The enormous problem that Canberra has experienced has stemmed from the fact that Brisbane was chosen after Canberra's nomination as the host
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .