Page 3104 - Week 08 - Thursday, 25 June 2009
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
I think that the people of the ACT would probably expect that, when these commitments are made, political parties actually do the basic research to look at whether that is something they can deliver on.
I want to say something briefly about strategic indicators, because that was discussed at length in the committee. In fact, the committee noted that DECCEW has the least effective strategic indicators of all departments. I would note that there is an openness to take the recommendations on the part of the minister and the department, and we welcome that.
I think the other thing that I would say in relation to the minister and this department is that the minister was, perhaps aside from the plastic bags issue, reasonably forthcoming with answers. I think that Minister Corbell was more forthcoming than a number of his ministerial colleagues in giving reasonable answers. He did not have to defer to his officials as much as we saw from some other ministers. The Chief Minister and TAMS, in particular, did not seem interested in answering any questions. Mr Hargreaves, in a number of his, did not seem to have the answer to some pretty basic questions. So I would commend Mr Corbell at least for his performance in part of the estimates committee in relation to environment. There were some fulsome answers given. We in the opposition certainly appreciate that. But I think, to give Mrs Dunne a little more time, I will leave it there.
MRS DUNNE (Ginninderra) (11.20): Mr Speaker, as both you and Mr Seselja said, this is a new department which covers important issues for the ACT. Many of the agencies and functions were buried away in a number of agencies and it is useful to have them brought under one roof. This is something I applaud. Like Mr Seselja, I applaud the minister for his willingness to take the recommendations of the estimates committee seriously. The government responded to every recommendation in relation to this department as either agreed, agreed in part or noted, and full supporting arguments were also given. I look forward with anticipation to the enhancement of the accountability indicators over the next 12 months, as both you and Mr Seselja have said. Also on the bouquet side of the ledger, like Mr Seselja, I want to thank the minister for giving fulsome answers to some quite detailed questions on notice. I hope this augurs well as a positive sign for future information sharing across the chamber.
It is worth dwelling on two or three of the major items of expenditure, particularly on the water side, but there are a couple of others as well. The $13.9 million over two years for the integrated urban waterways program for the construction of two new wetland ponds in Dickson and Lyneham is welcome and is an augmentation of the already commenced program. This has a whole range of benefits, not least of which is the removal of the rather ugly “concretised” parts of Sullivans Creek. I hope that this will be a succesful venture and over time we will see considerable improvement in our stormwater system across the ACT, and not just in relation to Sullivans Creek. The area around Curtin could be, if nothing else, substantially beautified by the removal of that unnecessary concrete. It seems that we have moved on in our approach to stormwater management over the years.
Other issues of concern for me are the $2 million for the tune-up Canberra program for improving the efficiency of commercial office buildings, and the $1.9 million over
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .