Page 1879 - Week 06 - Wednesday, 25 June 2008
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
MR SESELJA: I table the following paper:
Proposed gas fired power station and data centre—Copy of Letter to Tom Percival, Project Manager, Land Use Planning, ACT Planning and Land Authority, from Ken Douglas, Acting Director, Economic, Regional and Planning Branch, Chief Minister’s Department, dated June 2007 (2).
An LDA document on 4 July shows that Mr David Dawes had been telling other officials that industrial land supply was a priority factor. I seek leave to table that document.
Leave granted.
MR SESELJA: I table the following paper:
Proposed gas fired power station and data centre—Copy of Email to Gordon Lowe from Ray Stone, Project Director, Land Development Agency, dated Wednesday, 4 July 2007 (2).
Mr Dawes told the Assembly that the Chief Minister’s Department was not involved until a month later, after the government had presented ActewAGL with a Hobson’s choice on the location of the power station, and Mr Stanhope sat there mute while this was being said.
The fourth basis for this no-confidence motion is that in identifying a site for the facility Mr Stanhope and his government failed to properly consider the impact of the data centre and gas-fired power plant on residents. Mr Stanhope has a low regard for the residents of Tuggeranong and Woden. He bragged to estimates:
So, I think that is a great win-win that we had managed to satisfy this proponent for this major billion dollar investment whilst retaining the capacity to release industrial land to meet significant pent-up demand within the community for industrial land at Hume. So, it was a classic win-win. Everybody won out of the ultimate decision. I think it was a fantastic result.
Win-win! He does not seem to consider that upset residents in Tuggeranong and south Woden count as anybody. The opposition believes that these residents do count. We believe they have been treated shabbily by this government. This was a major industrial project. We believe that a responsible government should have considered the impact on the public in selecting a site.
This was not an over-the-counter transaction at arm’s length from ministers. Mr Stanhope had a personal role in considering a direct sale of land, so government had a very hands-on involvement in determining what sites could be considered. Mr Stanhope scoffed at me when I said community impact should have been considered. In his words:
… that is a very, very dangerous position … He is advocating that ministers should make judgements in the interests of the community ...
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .