Page 1182 - Week 04 - Wednesday, 20 March 2013
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
There are serious questions about the way that this whole planning process has been done, and as far as your so-called amendment is concerned, I guess this is where it becomes difficult not to get disappointed and angry. It is nothing more than an attempt to make sure that the Assembly records that, indeed, you have done everything according to Hoyle; everything has been done; consultations are all in line; everyone is happy. But not everyone is. If you want to talk to all of the clubs, you will find that there is quite a bit of concern about the position that they are being put into. If you substitute the various athletic clubs in this amendment with the names of schools and the consultation that accompanied school closures, you will see the same cover-up approach that was ACT Labor’s version of consultation.
The fact, minister, that you took all day to come up with the amendment and gave it to us when I was halfway through my speech does not exactly show any notion of cooperation with us on this. It shows clearly that you have no intention of trying to seek Assembly consensus.
I am particularly disappointed, I guess, at the initial reaction of—
Mr Barr interjecting—
MADAM ACTING SPEAKER: Mr Barr! Mr Doszpot.
MR DOSZPOT: Thank you, Madam Acting Speaker. I was about to say that I was particularly disappointed with the initial reaction of Mr Rattenbury. We also have tried to have a little discussion on this, but I believe that he now understands the story a lot more than he did at the outset. And I would certainly encourage that. A lot of the things that Mr Rattenbury said, I will and do agree with—the fact that if we are talking about an option for a facility that cannot be utilised by everyone, or it is not up to scratch, then there has got to be an alternative that would help all of the clubs in Canberra. And that basically is not far from the real issue.
I know that the government is committed to continue to work with little athletics and others, and I trust and sincerely hope that there is no bullying into accepting a less than acceptable solution. I guess one of the things I would like to close on is that we see the government’s motion as nothing short of filibustering. Proper consultation, genuine dialogue and open and legitimate discussion and comparison of all the options would lead to the athletics community getting the facility that they want.
It would also lead to a government getting credit for their efforts, Mr Barr, and all of Canberra’s athletes getting what they need. All you need is to consult widely, listen to what the people are saying. This is what I am saying to you. Instead, Canberra’s athletes on the south side at the moment face the prospect of a substandard facility that will have limited value as an elite sporting venue. Sure, it will be a synthetic track, but it will leave other clubs behind.
We have emails coming into our office from other clubs pointing out that they do not oppose Woden having improvements on their track, but it will only benefit around 400 children, when the rest of Canberra’s athletics participants, perhaps three times
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video