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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 05 Hansard (Tuesday, 25 May 2004) . . Page.. 2156 ..

of all Canberrans are weighed in a planning decision. That has been occurring here, and it has been occurring for many years.

Ms Tucker might well have a very valid point. If there had not been a huge amount of debate in relation to this matter—if this had been a concept that had not been around for a long period of time; if this was something the government or the Assembly were foisting onto the people of Canberra—the point she raised would be very valid indeed, but it is not.

This matter has been considered at length by the community and by the community’s representatives over a number of Assemblies. It has had its preliminary assessments; environmental issues have been looked at and done to death; and there have been various appeal rights exercised by members of the community over a period of time. We cannot, as legislators in a democracy, neglect the views of a minority—in this case I suspect a fairly small minority. Those views are important and have been given due consideration over a number of years in a number of forums, and indeed in this Assembly as well.

In a democracy the views of the majority also have to be considered; you have to weigh up the pros and cons. The pros in favour of this road far outweigh the cons. We have a growing community in Gungahlin and it is essential that they be provided with appropriate access. For all the talk about sustainable transport systems and the like, we are not going to get away from the fact—probably for a number of decades—that roads are terribly important and we need roads for people to get around. This is a spread-out city.

Everywhere else, no matter where you are, you can get into Civic basically in about 30 minutes, even at peak hour. Like Mrs Burke, I have made a point of sitting in traffic, coming from the Gungahlin town centre, just to see how long it takes. The times I tried it, it took me an hour or thereabouts. I also looked at ways of doing rat-runs and things like that.

I can really sympathise with the people of Gungahlin and the need for this road. It is something the opposition has promised; it is something the government has now accepted on the route it always should have been on, and it is important that we get on and do it. We have given it careful consideration. We have weighed the advantages and disadvantages for the various community groups. Canberrans should be able to enter and leave Gungahlin with ease and the GDE is the best way of doing it, as the preamble to this bill says. Governments are accountable and Assemblies are accountable. If we are making an error here the final arbitrators will be the people of Canberra. People will lose their seats and governments might be lost.

There are some further protections in this particular bill and in this process today. My colleague Mrs Dunne will be moving an amendment which will enable an authorisation to be a disallowable instrument, and Mrs Cross is doing the same thing. As members know, a disallowable instrument is something that can be brought back to this Assembly within six days and if someone wants to disallow it they will do it quickly. As members know, if the Assembly is not sitting it takes nine signatures to recall the Assembly, as we have done today. It is something that can be done quickly. If a majority of the Assembly feels that the instrument should be disallowed, that will occur. But, of course, if it is

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