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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 07 Hansard (Thursday, 1 July 2004) . . Page.. 3124 ..

have heard it from Jon Stanhope as well. We are being supine to the New South Wales government. We are not out there saying, “You have a Commonwealth constitutional responsibility to meet certain requirements for the people of the ACT and their water supply and you are failing to do it.” Instead we are having a mates’ meeting between Frank “we’re on top of the problem” Sartor and Ted “don’t you worry about it” Quinlan. This is what is happening; we are having a complete failure.

To make “Think water, act water” a proper water resources management plan we need to adopt a demand management plan; to know what the people of the ACT and the region will need from our water supply; to adopt and develop an infrastructure and augmentation development plan to support the territory plan; to establish, as I have said, a catchment management authority; to adopt a whole-of-territory catchment rehabilitation plan because most of it was burnt down in 2003; and to support the development and facilitation of cross-border rehabilitation of the catchment. Members of the government are not doing any of that. They are relying on a collection of aspirations with pathetic targets that are so far out that no-one will ever hold them to them and, as a result, we have a flawed water resources management plan.

There is no support in this place for this plan, although there is general admission that the whole thing is flawed. It really boils down to the fact that most of the members on the crossbench are so transfixed by the idea that the Liberals would be championing environmental issues that it just does not compute. Gee, when Vicki Dunne and the Liberals start talking about environmental issues they go, “What is that about? No, we can’t possibly agree with that.” The Water and Sewerage Amendment Bill 2004 was adjourned yesterday. Because it was not the government’s idea, they could not possibly support it. Again today they are not prepared to do anything—

MR SPEAKER: Order, members! Mrs Dunne has the floor.

MRS DUNNE: substantial about water resources issues in the ACT because it was not their idea.

MR SPEAKER: Order! This is a debate not a conversation. Mrs Dunne.

MRS DUNNE: That was borne out by Mr Quinlan in his opening statement. He said, “Here is the opposition again gainsaying and naysaying.” He did not even listen. I said that there were things of merit in the plan but that, put together, they do not make a water resources management plan. I still contend that. There is nothing that Mr Quinlan or Mr Stanhope has said that changes the views of the opposition. I commend the motion to the Assembly.

Question put:

That Mrs Dunne’s motion be agreed to.

The Assembly voted—

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