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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2000 Week 4 Hansard (30 March) . . Page.. 1181 ..

MR KAINE (continuing):

If all that is going to happen is that Impulse is going to come here and build a hangar, train a few people and fly a few aeroplanes in and out and that is the end of the line, you might ask questions about it. The fact is, though, that this incremental increase in activity at the airport will be like what we would see on dropping a big rock into a pond of water. We will see the ripples for years. If you go to any airport of substance anywhere else in the world, you will find around that airport all kind of ancillary activity, very little of which is currently at Canberra Airport because the activity there has not been of such volume as to warrant or to attract the kind of ancillary activity that you usually find around airports.

As I said before, Qantas and Ansett have not brought a lot of business into this place. Having a locally based airline introduces a different flavour. It is a matter of not only the direct and indirect consequences of what Impulse does but also, if you like, the further indirect consequences of increased activity at the airport that will engender and encourage all sort of activity out there that we would not otherwise see. I think we have to go beyond the $10m, in total, that the Government is proposing to put in here. We have to look at the next 10 years and beyond as to what this sort of activity will generate and have regard for all of that.

I have looked at all the information available to me. I think that it might have been better had this proposal been handled on a bipartisan basis. Perhaps the Chief Minister could have involved some people from this place in the debate before dropping it on us in an announcement on the radio only three or four days ago it. That might have led to a better approach to this proposal, but it does not detract from the merit of the proposal. For the Government and the Opposition to be kicking it backwards and forwards across this chamber as though it is a political issue when it is, in fact, an economic issue is to detract from the merit of the proposal, and I think that is most unfortunate.

I find it a most attractive proposal. I think that the Government is right in making a small investment in it. I think that everybody in this place ought to support that. Let us get on with the business, instead of arguing about it. The fine detail can be brought about in the agreement which, we are told, will be in place three months from now. That is what we ought to look at carefully.

MR QUINLAN (5.08): Mr Stanhope pointed out earlier that the development of the airport is part of ALP policy. It was part of ALP policy before the last election. It was certainly underscored at the 1999 annual conference of the ALP because I was underscoring it. I have also supported this process in other forums. But the old saying that it ain't what you do but the way that you do it sometimes applies. There has been some discussion about requests for information. I think that those requests have been fairly reasonable. I do not quite agree with Mr Kaine that it is purely an economic issue and not a political issue. Let us be sure of a couple of things. This is a red-hot speculative venture. We have an airline that, according to the papers I have seen, has the capacity at any given time to carry about 228 passengers. It is going to - - -

Mr Rugendyke: Do not support it if you do not like it.

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