Page 1659 - Week 05 - Thursday, 8 May 2008
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
level in the arts. You still have the percentage for arts program. I think people are very sceptical about that.
If the $750,000 on artworks spent on Gungahlin Drive is anything to go by, I think people would much rather have that bit of money go towards doing the road properly. That monstrosity down near the Federal Highway is probably quite dangerous if someone went skewing off the road there. So I think your percentage for arts program is something you could revise. That could certainly be money better utilised.
I do not see anything in the budget either—and I might be wrong here, having a quick look through it, but it certainly is not highlighted in red for the future in terms of Belconnen—as to what is happening with the new arts facility which has been on the cards for some years now. It had money allocated to it last year. I hope there is money in the budget for that. I cannot see you not doing that.
Mr Corbell: Yes, there is.
MR STEFANIAK: Mr Corbell says yes. I am pleased to see that because that is a much-needed facility. Again, perhaps just as an aside, it is not prominent in the various budget papers and, in terms of being ready for the future, that would be a logical thing to stick in there under Belconnen.
Mr Seselja mentioned in his speech the dragway. Maybe you have finally been quite honest about that. I cannot see any money for the dragway. My understanding was that at least was a continuation, as you maintained the farce, of perhaps trying to reactivate the old site which no federal government, unfortunately since 1999, has been interested in doing. Maybe that is a final admission that your supposed commitment to a dragway, the false promises you made in 2001 and 2004—it seems with little intention to keep—was all nonsense. Finally that facade has gone.
If there is money in there, again I would be interested to see it. I cannot. Perhaps it is something that can be confirmed that at least you have finally taken money out for a project you never had any intention of actually bringing back. Those are some of the comments I wish to make in relation to that.
In the five or so minutes remaining, let me make some comments in relation to justice and community safety. There are some initiatives here which I certainly would applaud—some extra money, $2.8 million over four years, for improved court technology in the case management systems. There are still problems there. This has been an ongoing problem for probably close to a decade. Hopefully, we are getting to a stage now where finally most of the bugs will be out the system. I am pleased to see provision for new CCTV cameras and playback facilities to assist multiple witnesses and improve court technology.
In terms of your Supreme Court building, the $220,000 there, might I say this has cropped up from time to time. Fundamentally, people are much more interested in what comes out of that court—the judgements of that court—and that court hopefully getting it right in terms of community expectations than being in a nice, new, luxurious building. I think people are far more interested in that than building a new building.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .