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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 05 Hansard (Tuesday, 25 May 2004) . . Page.. 2168 ..

appeal, which I basically agree with, but there are exceptions to that principle. The GDE argument is one of those exceptions. It has not been an easy decision for me, which is one of the reasons why I had to look into this very carefully. But I must consider the interests of the Gungahlin community as a whole.

In a democracy, we must look at the interests of the majority. That is what a democracy is about. While I do not wish the Assembly to consider this as a precedent—and future governments and this government should not consider this action we are taking today as an excuse to do it again in the future—it is very important that we do call the government to account. Given that we are the elected representatives of the people of the ACT, I felt this amendment for a disallowable instrument would at least give the community an opportunity to lobby their members who could bring concerns into this place and debate issues of concern rather than delay the GDE outside this place. In fact, it is a pity because the GDE has been on the territory plan for 30 years.

Both the major parties went to the last election promising to build a road. And it is a pity that the government did not just go ahead with the eastern alignment, because that was indeed the better option. The public interest is important to me. That is why I worked on this bill and the possible amendments, only one of which I decided to move this morning.

I wish to say to those that were opposed to this bill, “I know you’re disappointed, but at the end of the day we had to make a decision which was good for the Gungahlin community and in the broader interest of the Canberra community.” It is very important that, as a democracy we, the elected members of the ACT residents, have an opportunity to represent their sentiments. That is what I feel that I have done today, and that is what I feel that the majority of the members of this place have done today. So I commend the amendment to the Assembly and hope that it has the Assembly’s support.

MRS DUNNE (12.32): The opposition will be supporting this amendment because it brings powers for decisions and discretion as to whether decision should continue into the hands of the legislature. As Mrs Cross and others have said, we have wrestled with the notion of taking away appeal rights. As the bill was drafted by the government, it was draconian, even fascist, in its application. And by making these authorisations disallowable instruments, it brings to the legislature the power of scrutiny.

This is appropriate because what we are doing today is sending a very strong message to the entire community and, in a sense, to the judiciary that it is the will of this Assembly, and through it the will of the people, that this road be built and we should not be brooking any more interference. This is a very strong message that we are sending. By making this a disallowable instrument, it actually reinforces in the minds of the community, and I hope in the minds of the judiciary, that, if something comes before them, not only has the minister exercised his discretion but that exercise of discretion has been reinforced by the Assembly.

This should be an end to it because the most important thing that we do today is facilitate the building of the road which has been delayed unconscionably by a small group of people who have had their day, have exercised their rights; but it is now time to put it to bed, put it down to experience, and let the people of Canberra get the road that they need, not just the people of Gungahlin.

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