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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 05 Hansard (Friday, 14 May 2004) . . Page.. 2041 ..

concessional leases. We have been waiting for that review of concessional leases for quite a long time, and it seems pertinent now.

Despite all the different offers being put forward—and the government offer as well—from my conversation with ACTAFL this afternoon it appears ACTAFL are willing to consider the government’s offer and will look at accepting the government’s offer. So the $800,000 will be expended in this financial year. We will have to wait for the government’s response in August to see if that happens. If it does happen, the government in itself has this asset that it must decide what to do with in the future. Just as there is no guarantee that a developer will keep it for sporting facilities, there is no guarantee that a government will keep the land for sporting facilities. We have seen ovals change; we have seen nature conservation parks change; we have seen many different things under the territory plan change.

The government should consider carefully what it intends to do with the oval: negotiate some of the other offers that have been put on the table or retain it as a sporting oval, but in partnership with community organisations so that the cost to the territory is minimal. We could use that money for the upkeep of a sporting facility to help young people get fit and active—a healthy outcome. Supporting a professional oval does not necessarily do that by itself, and there needs to be a focus on healthy outcomes for youth in the ACT.

MS TUCKER (9.42): The key issue of contention in the third appropriation bill is the $800,000 to purchase the improvements made by ACTAFL to Phillip Oval. I do not have a problem with the ACT government negotiating with ACTAFL a surrender of their concessional lease for this oval, as it is clearly in a run-down condition. There is an ongoing problem with concessional leases in the ACT, and I await with interest the outcome of the seemingly interminable review of concessional leases that the government are presently conducting.

I share the view, however, of community groups such as the Woden Community Council that there are problems with trading in those leases and that, rather than shift the lease from one club to another, the government should take it back and reissue it in an open process, with public consultation on any lease conditions that might be imposed. That is why I was so vocal in opposing the deal that was done over the Hungarian Australian Club in Narrabundah and why I am pleased that the government has now taken a stronger line.

The state of Phillip Oval has to be acknowledged. It is a competition standard, enclosed oval, one of only five or six in Canberra which, given its drainage and surface, would cost at least $5 million to replace. But it is in a seriously run-down condition, which has become a burden to ACTAFL, given that it now has a responsibility to run its business at Manuka.

We are all aware that a commercial development proposal, which was on the table, would in the end have required the lease to be deconcessionalised. Fortunately government is not prepared to do that. I understand that the developer is still covering some of the maintenance costs, or did so until recently, so the sooner the current arrangement ends the better.

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