Page 1416 - Week 04 - Thursday, 26 March 2009
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
water-sensitive urban design projects and the restoration of urban waterways, such as Sullivans Creek, with new water management ponds in Flemington Road in Mitchell, and with irrigation upgrades on our sporting fields to minimise the amount of water used on our sports grounds, playing fields and open public places.
The government is also significantly investing in rebates and incentives to assist householders and commercial building owners to reduce water consumption, such as rainwater tank rebates, the garden smart program and programs such as the toilet smart program for households and commercial office buildings as well as a range of other rebate programs to help reduce water use by updating water appliances in dwellings and other buildings with more efficient fixtures.
The government has recently launched a new financial incentive scheme aimed at encouraging commercial property owners and managers to improve water efficiency in their buildings. Property owners have been given the opportunity to participate in this program, which will see the government provide on a dollar-for-dollar basis up to $20,000 per property for water efficient bathroom and toilet retrofitted products.
That is all evidence of a government that is committed not just to supply augmentation but also to serious work in demand management. These programs have demonstrated real success. Over the last three years, we have saved more than 10 gigalitres of water as a result, with nearly 11 and a half gigalitres in 2007-08. These measures are having an effect, and it would be completely misleading to claim that the government’s policy is focused solely on supply augmentation. It also has a very strong emphasis on demand management and the establishment of alternative non-potable sources of supply.
Planning—Deakin swimming pool
MR DOSZPOT: My question is to the Minister for Planning, Mr Barr. Minister, in response to your answers to my questions yesterday regarding the committee recommendations with regard to the development at the Deakin pool site, you said:
… some of the conditions associated with the recommendations of the committee were on the basis that the owner of the facility would go ahead with some major office redevelopments which have not occurred.
Minister, how do you explain your statement that redevelopment has not occurred when there is a major office redevelopment that has replaced the netball, the indoor soccer and the indoor cricket facilities formerly on the site? Mr Speaker, I seek leave to table some photographs to that effect.
Leave granted.
MR DOSZPOT: I table the following papers:
Deakin pool site—Commercial development—Copies of photos (6).
MR BARR: For Mr Doszpot’s benefit, as he was not in this place at that time—but Mr Seselja should know, as he was on the committee—the recommendations of the committee were in fact to allow the development to go even further than what was approved, and, in return for going even further with his commercial developments,
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .