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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2001 Week 5 Hansard (3 May) . . Page.. 1490 ..

MR CORBELL (continuing):

strategies and discounts on land release strategies to encourage employment location in the Gungahlin Town Centre? No, it is not. Is the government prepared to look at a range of other measures, such as the fast tracking of broadband cable connections into the Gungahlin Town Centre to ensure that it does not have some competitive disadvantage compared with other parts of the city? No, it is not. That is a completely unacceptable response from the government. It only takes a very quick reading of the government's response to see that that is the case.

Mr Speaker, the other point I would like to make very briefly this evening-I am sure that there will be an opportunity to debate this response at some length later-is the government's assertion that the western alignment would have a more significant impact on areas of Bruce and O'Connor Ridge than the eastern alignment. That is a nonsense argument; it is an absolute nonsense argument. First of all, in relation to the Kaleen grasslands there is every possibility that the alignment, whether it is eastern or western, could traverse the area between Kaleen and North Lyneham in a way that would have minimal impact on the Kaleen grasslands. The government knows that. The government knows that it can be done, but it is blinkered in its view of the ability of the road to address that issue.

Secondly, the assertion of the government is that the western alignment would affect remnant vegetation on Bruce Ridge in a more significant way than the eastern alignment. The government fails to recognise in that assertion that its proposed alignment cuts through the O'Connor and Bruce Ridge precinct in such a way that, effectively, it divides the nature park unit in two. It disrupts the continuity of the nature reserve between the areas to the west and the areas to the east in a way that the western alignment does not, because the western alignment, for the greater part of its length, travels through already developed areas. The government has failed to recognise that point. It has failed to recognise that establishing a road through the centre of a nature park area would have far more impact than establishing it along the edge.

We all understand edge impacts when it comes to development close to nature conservation areas. I would certainly hope that the minister for the environment understands that. To establish such a road through the centre of a nature park area in a way that disrupts the integrity of the nature conservation unit is just irresponsible and negligent. That was the response that we got from this government, an irresponsible and negligent response.

The government's response to the recommendations in my dissenting report, along with its response to other recommendations in the majority report, continues to miss the point. It continues to miss the need with this debate to balance engineering considerations with environmental considerations, social and aesthetic considerations, and sustainability considerations. The government refuses to acknowledge those considerations in responding to this report. It has missed key opportunities here to respond in a positive way to issues such as employment location and the development of an effective employment activity centre in the Gungahlin Town Centre. For that reason, Mr Speaker, I can express immediately that this response is a disappointment and a missed opportunity again from this government to address this issue in a realistic and appropriate way.

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