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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2000 Week 7 Hansard (29 June) . . Page.. 2334 ..

MR SMYTH (continuing):

were sold under you, and the lease conditions, the lease terms and the development conditions were set by the Labor Party. We are still coping with your legacy. You need to acknowledge that, Mr Corbell. It has taken all of this time to rectify your mistakes.

Mr Corbell said we are not doing anything. Mr Corbell, we are doing something. We are working with many groups to revise the AMCORD, the residential development code. I hope we will shortly have ACTCode 2, a revised version that is applicable to the ACT and that says we can maintain and improve the quality of life in the ACT.

Mr Corbell got on his hobbyhorse about the lack of resources for PALM. I attended an afternoon tea with the shopfront staff at PALM the other day, and they are absolutely proud of their endeavours and the reaction they are getting from people who come in to utilise their services. Why? Because they are providing better service, clearer service and more concise advice quicker and faster, and are processing development applications better than ever before, because we have empowered the staff. They are doing an excellent job. They should not be criticised by Mr Corbell if they are doing something better and faster and cheaper. This is what government is about. It is about doing things better, and we are doing that. The staff at PALM are to be congratulated for what they have done, because they have done it very well.

Mr Corbell also talked about compliance. We passed some amendments to the land act on Tuesday night that reinsert into the schedule the ability to enforce compliance issues in the ACT. The compliance section were very pleased to see that back in the legislation, and they will be getting on with compliance now because we have given them the tools to do so. I think I tabled that legislation in February. It is a shame it took four months for it to get through.

Mr Corbell also talked about not funding Environment ACT appropriately. As I have just told Ms Tucker, the budget for the environment has gone up over successive years. There is extra money. Whether you choose to believe that or not, I quite frankly do not care, but there is extra money there. The advice given to me by public servants from my department is that there is extra money.

The proof of the eating is in the pudding. Mr Corbell said that we had all these action plans and we were getting stuck into it but that there were no resources to carry out the plans. Yet, at the end of his speech, he was saying, "Because there is not enough money, there is not enough policy coming out of the department." You cannot have it both ways. Either we are or we are not. In fact, we are doing both. We are putting out the policy and we are carrying out our functions. (Extension of time granted.) The first round of action plans are already being reviewed to see whether we are coping with them. I believe we are doing very well in that regard.

What can you say about Mr Hargreaves? He gave a sterling performance. He asks and answers his own questions and then he forgets about them. He talked about roads. We are committed to road funding. The road funding program that we have outlined will occur. Mr Hargreaves said that parking and traffic infringement notices are just revenue raisers and that the speed cameras are there just to make money. Then he said, "Why is CTP so much higher in the ACT than it is in New South Wales?" If you would sit still for a minute, Mr Hargreaves, and pay some attention, you would understand. We forecast $2 million from traffic infringement notices from the speed cameras. What will

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