Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .
Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2001 Week 10 Hansard (28 August) . . Page.. 3394 ..
MR HIRD (continuing):
They raised a number of issues. Our colleague Mr Kaine drew attention to this matter at question time on the day that I received this letter. I undertook to answer those queries in detail. I did so. I will table the letter again so that members can understand the issues and the points that were raised. But the Save the Ridge group do not say that the only issue on which they base their argument to discredit this report is recommendation No 24. There are 24 other recommendations which traverse a wide range of issues, but the Save the Ridge group do not give the committee any credit for that.
At point 7 of my response to the Save the Ridge letter, I said:
28. Save the Ridge claims that its position on the GDE and its alignment were 'misrepresented' in the committee's report. Save the Ridge, in Attachment A to its correspondence, provides excerpts from Dr Tanner's oral testimony.
29: A majority of the committee (Mr Corbell dissenting) does not dispute this testimony but points out that it needs to be set alongside the following passage in the written submission by Save the Ridge dated 31/8/99-
two years ago-
[page 12 of Part A of that submission]:
"We oppose the proposed eastern extension of the Gungahlin Parkway through Bruce/O'Connor ridge ... In particular, we oppose the eastern spur to Barry Drive. If there must be a road, and we are far from convinced that this is necessary, 'the community option' or western route is preferable on several environmental grounds".
To me it is very clear that some people will not be satisfied with whatever is done. At the end of the day someone needs to make a decision. This issue has been around from the late 60s, 70s, 80s and the time of the Third Assembly. We have made a decision; we have brought in a finding. But because certain elements within the community are not happy with that finding, they do not accept the umpire's decision. I believe that the people of Gungahlin and the people of Belconnen need a road system that will service them, and I will be supporting the eastern route. (Further extension of time granted.)
Before I conclude my remarks, I have to raise something that has saddened me. I have been in this place for many years, both as a member of the advisory body and as a member of this place. I have served in the armed services. In all that time I have never said that people should resort to physical violence to get their point across. We all make mistakes and I trust that Ms Tucker made a mistake on the evening of 20 August this year when she made certain remarks at a meeting. A report in the Canberra Times stated:
"Stay strong on the issue," Ms Tucker said.
"There is potential in this community to physically stop this road if that's what we have to do."
Inciting people to break the law is not a trait that should be even contemplated by a member of this chamber. You do not break the law by inciting riots or urging people to use physical violence because you do not get your own way. Even the Save the Ridge
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .