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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2001 Week 1 Hansard (14 February) . . Page.. 182 ..

MR CORBELL (8.36), in reply: Mr Speaker, it is fairly clear tonight what is the will of this place and I am grateful to those members who have indicated their preparedness to support this important motion. It is also clear tonight that we have a minister for heritage who thinks that something is of heritage value only if you can see it or access it.

Mr Smyth: I did not say that.

MR CORBELL: That is exactly what the minister said.

Mr Smyth: You have misrepresented me.

MR CORBELL: I am sorry, Mr Smyth, it is exactly what you said.

Mr Hargreaves: Only streetscapes.

MR CORBELL: You said, "It's the streetscape. I can't see their blocks. It is not the blocks that are important; it is the streetscape." Mr Speaker, that displays a very limited understanding of the notion of heritage. Is the minister seriously saying that, unless he can visit Aboriginal sacred sites, they are not worth heritage listing? That seems to be his argument.

Mr Smyth: Again you take something out of context, Simon.

MR CORBELL: I will take the minister's interjection that I take words out of context. Let me throw this one at you, Minister. You used a definition of the word "review" in your defence of your government's actions in relation to this matter. You said that the words used by the Old Red Hill group, I think, were that "review" meant a formal assessment or examination of something with the possibility of change.

Mr Smyth, you should have read the whole definition. The whole definition of "review" according to the New Oxford Dictionary is a formal assessment or examination of something with the possibility or intention of instituting change. That is what this Assembly did last June and that is what you ignored. For the purpose of clarifying the record, let us look at the context of this decision last year. The land act spells out very clearly the powers of the executive and the powers of this Assembly in relation to the functioning of the ACT planning authority. Of course, it is a planning authority in name only because there is simply a public servant. It is a fiction of a planning authority, Mr Speaker.

Nevertheless, the land act sets out very clearly that the executive or the minister may give the authority written directions about the policies and objectives that it should pursue in the performance of its functions, directions to review-there is that word-the plan or any aspect of the plan, or directions about any other aspect of the performance of its functions. Those are the powers of the minister and of the executive in relation to the authority.

The act goes on to give the power to the Legislative Assembly to recommend by resolution that the executive give the authority written directions which are in accordance with the executive policy direction powers of the minister or the executive.

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