Page 5081 - Week 12 - Wednesday, 26 October 2011
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
Finally, in (d) and (e), it is important to restate the work the government is undertaking to improve the amenity of Civic, as it is known, by upgrading the public realm, including upgrades to paving, such as those which members can see directly outside this building, on London Circuit, improvements to street furniture and street lighting and improvements to toilet amenities, all of which are currently ongoing in the city area, as well as improvements to waste management, such as the commercial waste recycling activities being promoted by the ACTSmart range of programs, and our commitment to improving cycling facilities and infrastructure, including the government’s restated commitment to the development of the Civic cycle loop.
So there are a range of activities where the government is actively working, investigating and putting in place funding to deliver a range of very important improvements to amenity in the city infrastructure. I think this is a sensible restating of what is actually occurring in the city centre and what the processes are for dealing with large-scale commercial development proposals.
The government will not be supporting the motion in the form proposed by Ms Le Couteur. Instead, we propose the amendment, which seeks to address these issues in a logical, consistent manner and which reflects the processes and activities that are currently in place and underway.
MR RATTENBURY (Molonglo) (7.34): I rise tonight to speak in support of Ms Le Couteur’s motion. I think it is a valuable motion that Ms Le Couteur has brought forward, because I certainly share her concern about some of the issues facing the city centre. I am concerned about the closure of businesses in the area. We see throughout the city at the moment a number of vacant shopfronts and I think the anecdotal discussion that goes around suggests that there are significant issues with ownership of buildings in the city. I think it is worth this Assembly taking the time to discuss that issue, to canvass it and to work out whether we in fact can play a role—and I think we can—in seeking to overcome some of those issues that are facing the city.
I do not think it is good enough for us to simply sit back and hope that the problem sorts itself out. Certainly people that I speak to do have concerns about the state of the city and they recognise some of these issues. They recognise the increasing dominance of the Canberra Centre and they certainly intuitively understand the impact that that has on the rest of the city. So I think the fact that Ms Le Couteur has brought this forward is welcome.
What I think is disappointing is the lack of seriousness with which Mr Seselja took this motion when he stood up to speak today. I do not actually recall Mr Seselja discussing the issue at hand. He spent his entire speech denigrating Ms Le Couteur and the motion she had put forward and attacking the Greens and our record over the last couple of years. There is going to be a time and a place for that, but it is somewhat disappointing that Mr Seselja was not able to actually bring himself to discuss the issues that affect our city centre. In the 10 or whatever minutes he spoke for, I do not recall him touching on it at all and that is a real shame.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video