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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 03 Hansard (Wednesday, 10 March 2004) . . Page.. 1025 ..

Mr Chris Peters, chief executive of the Chamber of Commerce and Industry; Ms Annette Ellis, MP, member for Canberra; and Senator Gary Humphries believe it is time to close the recovery centre and move on. Ms Wendy Anderson, an affected resident of Weston Creek, and Mr Richard Tindale, owner of the National Zoo and Aquarium, believe it is time to close the centre and move on. They have studied it, they have discussed it, they have consulted on it, they have met with the ACT government, they have met with the recovery centre, and they have met with residents and resident groups. This group of expert advisers and community representatives has recommended to the government that the process that has been outlined be implemented. That is what they have recommended.

Over and above that, the recovery centre, on behalf of the government, contacted every client of the recovery centre. It met with 1,000 of them and asked them whether they are comfortable with this process and they indicated, almost unanimously, that, yes, this is what they want. We are now sitting here in judgement on that level of consultation and that level of response.

The Phoenix Association was consulted formally and yes, let us admit, Mr Richard Arthur did not agree. It is not that he was not consulted, it is that he did not agree with every detail of the proposal. But every member of the community and expert reference group did, including the president of the Weston Creek Community Council, including all of these other organisations, including the ACT Council of Social Service. They all agreed with every detail of the process.

One organisation did not agree with every detail, but that does not mean they were not consulted, and not consulted fully. It is just that they did not agree with every detail. For them to suggest that there was a breakdown or a break or a gap in the consultation that has been undertaken on this is simply not fair, and that is why I have this difficulty. This motion is not fair; it is not fair on the government, it is not fair on the recovery centre, it is not fair on the residents who have taken this step to move on. It is not fair.

MRS DUNNE (6.19): Mr Speaker, I think I probably need to seek leave to speak again.

Leave granted.

MRS DUNNE: Just briefly, I would like to explain why I have moved an amendment to put back the words that the Chief Minister seeks to take out. The standard Labor tactic on private members day is to amend motions by deleting all words after “that” with a view to substituting something else. I think this is about the fourth or fifth occasion on which members of the Liberal opposition have had to go back and attempt to reinsert essential words. Mr Speaker, the essential words in this case are to keep the recovery centre open until 30 June, until the government can report.

It is interesting that Mr Stanhope talked about the people who signed off on this recommendation unanimously. I am glad that he has raised this again—and this is why I sought leave to speak again—because there are people on that list to whom I have spoken and who expressed to me as recently as last Friday concern about the closing of the recovery centre. I will have to go back and re-read what is there, but, as recently as last Friday, Dr Tony Griffin expressed to me the view that he was not entirely sure about

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