Page 1917 - Week 07 - Thursday, 23 August 2007
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
process. It is disappointing that the government is not willing to honestly engage with the community. It appears to be the government’s way—no way.
It must be noted, too, as I alluded to, that the Woden Valley Community Council did not just rule this out out of hand. The six-page letter from the council to the minister that Dr Foskey tabled today outlines some 13 suggestions and options that came out of their consultations. They thought very carefully, and they very thoughtfully considered the future of Woden town centre and the environs. They are not a negative council; they do work. It would be extremely disheartening to see little, if any, of that being taken into account with the government pushing forward with their plan.
Today we see not only Dr Foskey but also the opposition, the Woden Valley Community Council and the broader Woden community having some problems with this variation to the territory plan. The pool has been mentioned. I know that Swimming ACT, which utilises the Phillip pool, is naturally concerned for the future. At point (h) of possible solutions and options, the Woden council suggested that the government should:
Agree to full public consultation with all stakeholders on pool provision prior to any changes to the lease of the current site and any announcement on the future provision …
I am not sure to what extent that has occurred and whether they have been satisfied by the government’s response. Again, we need to see consultation in the actual meaning of the word—not consultation that is one sided: “We’ll listen to you but we’re going to do our own thing anyway.”
The planning minister tells us that there will be a higher level of protection for sporting facilities. I think he said something like that; forgive me if I have got it wrong. I get concerned about things like that. From the past six years, knowing the way this government flip-flops around, I would say: can we really trust the words? The government says something today and then changes it next week. Mr Barr says that there are no new issues that have not been addressed. Is this code for “We’ve heard you all, but we’ll just do what we want to do anyway”?
This motion should be agreed to for the sake of common sense and for the future planning of the Woden Valley. We support the motion.
Members interjecting—
MR SPEAKER: Order, members! There are too many conversations going on. Mrs Burke has the floor.
MRS BURKE: I do have my voice back, but I agree with you, Mr Speaker: it is very hard. Just to finish off, let me say that I agree that we should revisit the whole situation in the context of what the Woden Valley Community Council worked so hard to put together and in terms of the future of planning and making sure that at the end of all this we do not come up with some hotchpotch arrangement that we regret. I commend Dr Foskey’s motion to the Assembly and will be supporting it.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .