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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 03 Hansard (Wednesday, 10 March 2004) . . Page.. 1021 ..

After discussions that I have had with members of the bushfire recovery task force, I am hesitant to force the recovery centre to remain at Lyons until the end of June, but I am disappointed that the information that has helped me make that decision has only come through in the last 15 minutes. And I think that raises further questions about how information is being supplied to the community and to the Assembly about what is happening next.

We have heard from different members of the Assembly today that there was consultation done with affected members of the community about the closure of the recovery task force, but the impression that I am getting is that nobody was actually told how that process will affect them on the ground, what will happen next or where those ongoing support needs will be located to support people in the community. And that is where I think the angst is coming from. That is why people are so interested in attaching themselves to the Lyons centre. I think it is a reaction until they know what is actually going to happen next.

So I think we can call on the government to continue to provide the services of the recovery centre in a visible and easily accessible way. That is an important point to make: that those services still need to be provided. I believe that the Lyons centre is an important symbol, but the symbol can be transitioned, although we need to hear that process. We need to understand where it is going and what will happen to the community. So we do not need to put an end date on how long that building in Lyons will operate but I think we need information from government about where things are moving to and how things will move forward.

I am also quite pleased to know that Ms Tucker has an amendment, which I will support. It is important, as I just said, that we cannot say that the government should continue to properly and extensively consult because, as I have just articulated, there are so many problems in relation to the transition arrangements that the government needs to get right. I foreshadow that when we see that report on the last sitting day of May, I will seriously—on reading that report—consider moving a motion that we get six-monthly updates on the bushfire recovery process, because I think that what this debate has shown is that things are operating in isolation and we all need the information so we can see what is actually happening and that the community can rest assured that the support services that they may need to cope with a disaster will be there.

MR SMYTH (Leader of the Opposition) (6.05): In speaking to the amendment I will put it to the crossbenchers that the amendment by Mr Stanhope is illogical. Ms Tucker said that obviously there has been some failure to consult and she wants to remove the words “continue to”. The motion will then read, “properly and extensively consult with bushfire survivors and other stakeholders on their future need”.

But if we then go to part 4, the Chief Minister is not required to report until the last sitting day in May. Then, if we have actually got this wrong and we have shut down the recovery centre, there is no going back. Thus, if we actually get it wrong, what we are going to do is get a report in May that says, “We got it wrong.” That will be useless. The opportunity is here to actually move forward in a logical and sequential way to make it work best for the victims out there.

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