Page 85 - Week 01 - Tuesday, 12 February 2008
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
employment in the ACT, as measured by the ABS, grew strongly from January 2006, largely due to a rise in the labour force participation rate to a record level. We have now run into difficulty with supply constraints, so increases in trend job ads have not translated into increases in employment. However, as part of the 2006-07 budget process before these difficulties arose, the Stanhope government created the ACT Skills Commission to address what had already been identified as a looming problem.
The opposition and the media may criticise the government from time to time—that is, after all, their role—but we must be doing something right. I think that what we are doing right is making the correct decisions by following good processes. Community consultation has never been stronger. I sometimes get frustrated because there are times when we cannot act quickly because of our commitment to consultation. Our community consultation produced the Canberra plan, which includes the Canberra social plan, the economic white paper and the Canberra spatial plan. Information about our commitment can be found on the ACT government website, particularly in two of my departments—the department of housing and community services and the Department of Territory and Municipal Services. Those sites outline a range of current projects on which the community is being consulted.
Admittedly, sometimes we could do better, but community feedback can sometimes be misleading. For example, on the Tharwa bridge, Mr Val Jeffrey is quoted in the Canberra Times on 20 September 2006 as saying that, although he loved the old bridge, he no longer cared if it stayed. He is also quoted, on 11 October 2006, as saying that the announcement of the building of a new concrete bridge was “the best bit of news we’ve had for a long time”. He continued: “We definitely need that new bridge and we need it urgently.” More recently, he has applauded the government’s decision to restore the old bridge.
Members of the opposition have made equally contradictory statements in relation to that bridge. Mr Pratt, for example, at different times has wanted a low-level crossing, the old bridge repaired and a new bridge. Before finally committing to the construction of a new bridge, the government conducted an additional survey of the community in December 2007. That survey showed there was still a diversity of views, but during 2007, while the tender process for a new bridge was being conducted, the community shifted its view and now wants the old bridge preserved. So that is what will happen, at a higher cost and over a longer period, but the government has responded to the voice of the community and it will get what it wants.
The GDE is a similar example. There was quite a diversity of views about it and, if we had ignored the community, and particularly the Liberal Party, the GDE would have been completed a year ago. As it is, we followed the process to the bitter end and the road will be completed later this year.
Another point that the government is criticised about is the road congestion around the airport. Some of that congestion was created by the airport itself, through the office and retail development in the area. Part of it was created through the sudden growth of Canberra. What have we done about it? I convened a summit of stakeholders and produced a plan and a timetable for roadworks that will alleviate the congestion. The government went through a process of examining the recommendations that came out of the task force established by the summit and committed to the plan for road
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .