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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2000 Week 1 Hansard (16 February) . . Page.. 172 ..

MR STANHOPE: I ask a supplementary question. If the Waldorf project, as just indicated by the Treasurer, received incentives in the form of stamp duty waivers on the basis of the sale of residential units, can the Treasurer explain, if he knows, whether or not it is true that the submission to the Commonwealth Government on the decision to relocate CHOGM, the submission prepared by the ACT business sector and tabled by the Chief Minister in this morning's debate, refers to the Waldorf as a four-star hotel, one that offers one three-bedroom presidential suite, 27 two-bedroom suites and another 105 suites? Can the Treasurer advise the Assembly whether, if that is the case, the incentive was mistakenly offered on the basis that the project proposed was a residential development? If so, will the Government investigate whether it should seek reimbursement of any moneys waived?

MR HUMPHRIES: I think Mr Stanhope has misunderstood what was occurring in respect of those apartments. They are units being offered for residential purposes, but they are also capable in some cases of being used in other ways. I understand that in respect of the potential to hold CHOGM in Canberra there was an agreement that some units in those apartments would be available on a hotel basis for the - - -

Mr Wood: Just as they are today. They are right now.

MR HUMPHRIES: That is fine. If they are available on a hotel basis, then presumably they would have been available as four-star hotel rooms for visitors to Canberra during CHOGM.

Mr Stanhope: Is the Waldorf a four-star hotel?

MR HUMPHRIES: The units are individually owned, as I understand it - at least most of them are. I assume it is possible some are owned for investment purposes or possibly some are owned by the Waldorf itself. The point is that the units were capable of supplying hotel-type accommodation during CHOGM. But they also clearly qualify as residential units for the purposes of the concessions that were offered by the Government's revitalisation scheme. Anyone has only to look at that building to appreciate that it has been a great success in turning disused, fairly unsightly office accommodation in the centre of our city into bright, attractive, functional residential accommodation, whether it is temporary hotel-type residential accommodation or residential accommodation of a more conventional kind. Either way, I think it has to be seen as a considerable success.

MR QUINLAN: Mr Speaker, my question is to the Minister for Urban Services in his role as Minister for the environment - a high-profile Minister for the environment, according to today's Canberra Times. Minister, your Chief Minister, when extolling the virtues of the proposed partnership between AGL and ACTEW, stated that an ancillary benefit would be the establishment of a natural gas-fired electricity generation plant. I recall that she asserted that this would make a positive contribution to the ACT greenhouse targets, addressing 50 per cent of greenhouse concerns, according to the Canberra Times of 7 December 1999. Can you explain to the Assembly how this would happen, or is it the case that the ultimate purchaser of the plant output will be entitled to

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