Page 2822 - Week 09 - Wednesday, 17 August 2005
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
environmental needs, we can in the course of three years, at 150 megalitres a day at times when there is the capacity to take that amount of water, top up Googong to at least 85 per cent; in other words, actually provide a dam at Googong with 100 gigaglitres or thereabouts of water within three years on a permanent basis. I think that is a fantastic response to the issues we face.
As to what I am going to do about the lack of water in Googong, I am going to support ActewAGL initially in the reticulation process that is currently under way, the engineering work that it is doing at Googong to increase the capacity from 20 to 150 megalitres a day, and the government will, with due consideration, look at Actew’s report on our future water needs and options for meeting them and will make a measured decision on the basis of the scientific work that has been done.
We will not do what the Liberal Party said it would do without any study, without any investigation, without any scientific background or knowledge. The day after the last election they were going to start work on a dam with no identification of the money, just go out there and build a dam. We have seen that, through just a bit of simple scientific, considered work, we can avoid the need for a dam for at least 20 years and perhaps forever. But we know the Liberals’ approach to these issues. We saw it out at the old Bruce Stadium: crash or crash through; do not think; do not work out the consequences; just charge ahead; promise to build something for $12 million and a year or two later turn up and pay the $100 million that the project cost.
Mr Quinlan: On impulse.
MR STANHOPE: On impulse: “We will do it.” No investigation, no study, no scientific basis and no background: just do it. This is the new approach, having learnt nothing: “We will just build a dam. Where will we build it? We will just build it at Tennent. With luck, it will fill. We are going to do it. We are going to do it in the hope that it is going to rain and that it is going to fill.” Let me tell you that it is not.
Families—violence
DR FOSKEY: My question is to the Minister for Children, Youth and Family Support. I understand the Australian government has committed $37.3 million to the family violence partnership program, and that this funding has been available to state and territory governments to provide programs aimed at preventing family violence in indigenous communities, but that the deadline is about to run out. Could the minister advise whether the ACT government will be receiving a proportion of this funding and where the negotiations with the Australian government are up to?
MS GALLAGHER: I thank Dr Foskey for the question. I will check with the Office for Children, Youth and Family Support. I do recall a letter on this subject so I will check the status of that and get back to the Assembly as soon as I can. Of course, the ACT government has responded to issues of family violence and support for children from indigenous backgrounds requiring extra support a number of times. Recently, in the second appropriation in the last budget, we funded Isabella House, a new housing option for young indigenous males to receive extra support, should they require it. We also provided for the establishment of the ATSI unit within the Office for Children, Youth
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .