Page 6023 - Week 14 - Wednesday, 8 December 2010
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
Mr Seselja: What, a curfew? Do you support the curfew?
MR BARR: I will come to the matter of the curfew in due course, Mr Seselja. In relation to those specific statements, I do not disagree with those statements, but I think you are trying to be too clever by half in knocking out a whole range of other important issues that I think the Assembly should comment on and it would be timely for the Assembly to have a view on.
It was certainly interesting to hear three speeches from the Canberra Liberals—and I am not sure I heard the word “Tralee” throughout those contributions, which I think were really only looking at part of this debate. So perhaps the challenge I will lay down now to Mr Seselja is that, if he would like the Assembly to support those statements he has made, particularly the “noting” paragraphs 1(a) and 1(b), he might consider withdrawing his amendment and seeking to resubmit it by way of adding to Mr Rattenbury’s motion. Then he might find that there would be support for elements of what he is seeking to achieve tonight.
I am not sure that that is really his intent. I suspect there might be just a little bit of politics here and that by moving his amendment this way and seeking to knock out all of the legitimate issues that Mr Rattenbury has raised—
Mr Seselja: Like the curfew?
MR BARR: No. As I said, I will come to the curfew in a moment. My position and the government’s position on the curfew is very clear and I think in 2010 one could describe a curfew for Canberra airport as a solution looking for a problem. There is no need for a curfew at Canberra airport, and as tourism minister I will never support a curfew at Canberra airport.
My view very firmly is that for Canberra’s long-term development as a tourism hub and our airport’s capacity to take new direct flights it is critical that we maintain a 24-hour operation at Canberra airport. I think we have the capacity, if we make the correct planning decisions, and if Airservices Australia’s review that the Chief Minister mentioned is completed and does address the issues that I acknowledge Mr Seselja and others have raised and indeed that have been raised with me in relation to those suburbs on the eastern side of Gungahlin and some areas of north Canberra, although I think the Gungahlin residents have the most legitimate concerns in that regard—
Mr Seselja: Watson is the main one in north Canberra.
MR BARR: and, I would acknowledge, parts of Watson as well. I have spoken with the airport about this and they support a change to ensure that those flights, particularly the flights to Melbourne and Adelaide, fly a little bit further north before either making their swing around to the west to head on to Adelaide or to turn south to head to Melbourne.
So the government cannot support Mr Seselja’s amendment as it stands at the moment because it would have the effect of knocking off all of the important points that
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video