Page 4865 - Week 13 - Wednesday, 11 November 2009
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
do not see one. She talks about ensuring that solar access to buildings is given higher consideration with tree replacements and that appropriate tree species are chosen. That is a very sensible contribution to a public debate. I do not understand where the agitation is in this motion.
Ms Le Couteur goes on to make a number of other important statements of principle in this motion that can set forth potentially—although it does not seem possible—a tripartisan approach to saying that these are the principles that this Assembly believes are important underlying factors as we go forward in a major tree replacement program. There was the absolute potential for there to be no politics in this. We could have had three parties that stood up and said, “These are the principles we agree to.” But, instead, the Chief Minister has chosen to launch a scathing attack on Ms Le Couteur, and I find that an unfortunate way to take this debate forward.
Mr Stanhope: I’m supporting her commissioner for sustainability inquiry with all those issues to be addressed. I have agreed that they should all be addressed by the commissioner.
MR RATTENBURY: There seems to be some agitation about the commissioner for the environment getting involved but then, at the same time, it has actually been agreed that this is a good thing to do.
Mr Stanhope: Well, I must say I am a little surprised you didn’t feel the need to consult with the government—your partners.
MR RATTENBURY: In so many ways, the Labor Party taught us everything we know, Mr Stanhope! I would simply urge the Assembly to look carefully again at Ms Le Couteur’s motion, because she has made some important points in it about the sorts of principles that we would want as the basis to go forward for a tree replacement program. I urge the Assembly to support the motion.
MRS DUNNE (Ginninderra) (4.26): I can see that there is going to have to be chocolate and champagne for unhappy partners, but I am not quite sure who is buying what for whom! I congratulate and thank Ms Le Couteur for bringing this matter forward, simply because it is one of the things that I had been planning to do, but she got there first. I do not begrudge her that; I just want to put that on the record as a way of demonstrating the extent to which this matter is occupying the minds of the people of the ACT.
I think that there is a general level of agreement in the chamber that this is a sensitive matter; it is an important matter; it is a matter that will take the wisdom of Solomon to resolve to maximum satisfaction. It is going to be an extraordinarily difficult task, and it will be an extraordinarily difficult task for many years to come. There is no way that you can brush off how important this will be to people in the ACT. The fact that every person in this place who has spoken has a strong view on this reflects the fact there are strong views in the community on this subject.
There are a few things that I need to put on the record: I think that the process that we have gone through in dealing with this has, up until now, been imperfect. That is not a
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video