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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 06 Hansard (Wednesday, 23 June 2004) . . Page.. 2504 ..

we’re about $1½ thousand behind there; and in Tasmania, $72,216, where again we’re a couple of thousand dollars in front.

Mr Speaker, the ACT has a very competitive pay offer on the table. No-one can doubt the accuracy of these figures and no-one can certainly suggest that the ACT is offering an inadequate pay offer when it comes to our nursing workforce, a very important workforce, which we want to value, retain and recruit further to into the future.

Mr Stanhope: I ask that further questions be placed on the notice paper, Mr Speaker.

Supplementary answer to question without notice

Policing—Manuka

MR WOOD: Mr Speaker, I have a question left over from yesterday from Mr Stefaniak about policing in Manuka and Kingston. I can advise that over the second half of last year, south district patrol had capacity to operate additional dedicated patrols in Manuka and Kingston under the umbrella of Project Fearless. These were occurring on Friday and Saturday nights during the warmer months in response to peak activity in this area and were additional to standard patrolling by south district officers.

With the expiration of Project Fearless, that extra activity has now been returned to the rostered dedicated patrol, which varies between Friday and Saturday night. And, of course, standard patrols are still available to respond to incidents there, as in any other area within the south district.

Pharmacy Amendment Bill 2004

Debate resumed.

MR SMYTH (Leader of the Opposition) (3.16): Mr Speaker, the opposition will be supporting Mrs Cross’s bill. We certainly support the intention of the bill and we support the intention of the amendments to be moved by Ms Dundas. There are some dilemmas as to whether the bill and the amendments actually achieve what they want to do and I understand there is agreement that we will go through the in-principle stage and come back to the detail stage later in the day to address this issue.

We in the opposition think it is important to keep pharmacies out of the supermarkets, out of the chains, for a very simple reason. Pharmacies are what we can call community glue. These days they are the vital shop in a shopping centre that actually holds shopping centres together. They are the vital difference between what might go on in a small suburban centre and a large shopping mall.

I want members—some may remember and some may not—to hark back to the days some time ago during the buyback of pharmacists’ provider numbers when Rivett lost its pharmacy. The removal of the pharmacy killed that shopping centre. You can make a case that people from Rivett can go down to Cooleman Court, which is the nearest large shopping centre that has a pharmacy, and to other suburbs which still have pharmacies. The effect of the removal of the pharmacy from Rivett was that the whole of the Rivett shops and the surrounding community suffered. The Rivett shops effectively died.

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