Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .
Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2000 Week 12 Hansard (5 December) . . Page.. 3628 ..
MR HUMPHRIES (continuing):
way in which the NRMA would use a strong market position to be able to take on board work, which was unfair to existing operators in the ACT. I do not think I have received that advice as yet.
I certainly believe that the issue Mr Quinlan has raised is a matter of real concern. I will take on notice the question he has raised and report to the Assembly, I hope by Thursday of this week.
MR QUINLAN: I thank the Chief Minister for that reply. I further ask: is the government happy with the current situation with the NRMA holding 100 per cent third party insurance in the ACT - and I think that may be a function of a market situation - and is there any prospect of breaking that particular monopoly?
MR HUMPHRIES: That is an interesting juxtaposition of issues and no doubt one that it is appropriate to talk about if -
Mr Quinlan: One might have a bearing on the other.
MR HUMPHRIES: Indeed, that is quite possible. The arrangements for the NRMA to have 100 per cent coverage of compulsory third party insurance in the ACT have been in place for some time - for many years, as I understand it. I believe that there has been earlier work done on the appropriateness of splitting that function from a single provider and having a multitude of providers, as indeed we now have a multitude of providers in other areas of insurance. I am not sure what stage that work has reached either but I will take that part of the question on notice as well and advise the Assembly hopefully this week.
MR CORBELL: My question is to the Minister for Urban Services. Minister, in relation to Gold Creek homestead you are quoted in the Canberra Times of 12 November as saying:
The ACT Government is currently looking at options for the site and has engaged a consultant to undertake a feasibility study.
However, a minute from the Infrastructure and Asset Management Group to PALM dated 22 September 2000 and headed "Gold Creek Homestead - Planning Feasibility Study" highlights your department's predetermined urban infill agenda with the homestead site. The minute says:
Thought needs to be given on alternative uses should the market not adopt aged persons accommodation. DTI's preference is that residential development should be an alternative use.
Minister, will you explain to the Assembly how we are to reconcile the apparent contradiction between your public statements about the homestead and your department's own preferred option of urban infill?
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .