Page 3895 - Week 09 - Wednesday, 25 August 2010
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
By way of comparative analysis and in order to understand the sorts of issues which TAMS and the government take into account, certainly we all accept that it would be nice to invest more heavily in Kambah and in all of our group centres. But I invite members to take a drive out to Scullin, which has not had the benefit of an upgrade at any time in the last 30 years. Go to Scullin and have a look at Scullin. Then go to Page and then go to any number of other of the shopping centres in the ACT.
Mr Doszpot: It is a damning indictment of this government.
Mr Smyth: But you stopped the program for a number of years. You stopped the program.
MR STANHOPE: Okay, I am more than happy to get out a comparative analysis on this. Actually, I will bring it with me tomorrow at question time. Just have a look at the Liberal Party’s record of achievement in investing. It is a poor and sorry record. We picked it up. We picked up the ball when we came into government and we have been pursuing it in a methodical, reasonable way. It included, of course, $1.4 million of investment in 2002-03 at Kambah. If you go to the other group centres, you will see that there has been ongoing work at Southlands, at Jamison and, as I said, at Kambah. I have got nothing against Kambah—
Mr Seselja: Just Tuggeranong in general.
MR STANHOPE: except that they received $1.4 million in 2002-03. There are 90 shopping centres. Mr Seselja asked what we have against Kambah. I think it is fairer to ask what has Mr Seselja got against that group centre or that shopping centre that will miss out completely if the government were to pursue this particular motion. What have you got against—
Mr Seselja: Maybe a little bit less of the public art.
MR STANHOPE: I am going to bring it in, Mr Seselja, tomorrow and I will let you know. I will let you know which of the shopping centres in the priority list, determined on objective criteria by the Department of Territory and Municipal Services, will miss out if this motion as proposed by Mr Smyth is pursued. We will identify this. We can do it.
Mr Seselja: The arboretum. We will take it from the arboretum.
MR ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Mr Hargreaves): Mr Seselja, please! You have been a really good boy so far.
MR STANHOPE: We can work out which shopping centre will be displaced as a result of Kambah having received $1.4 million in 2002-03 going straight back to the top of a list because of a political intervention in the process as proposed through this motion.
We are talking about 90 shopping centres. That is at the heart of this motion. What about the 89 that are not included in this motion? What do you say to those
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video