Page 3365 - Week 11 - Tuesday, 21 October 2014
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
MS GALLAGHER: I would start by saying that there are already funded services supported by the ACT government—some delivered through ACT Health, but also through Winnunga Nimmityjah—to support people who have an alcohol or drug addiction problem. In terms of access to services, those services are there. What this seeks to do is to provide a particular type of service, which is a live-in rehabilitation centre which is specific to and respectful of Indigenous culture and spiritual connectedness with the land. I am very confident that this will fill a gap that we have not been able to meet before.
At this stage, getting it operational remains the priority. We have not offered this service before. There are not many of these services available in this region—indeed, in New South Wales. This will be an opportunity to provide extra resources and extra capacity and I think will be very much welcomed by the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander community—and indeed the drug and alcohol community, who have sought this type of service for some time.
MADAM SPEAKER: A supplementary question, Mr Smyth.
MR SMYTH: Chief Minister, was the minister instructed or advised to call in the bush healing farm DA?
MS GALLAGHER: As Mr Smyth knows, the call-in power is a power that rests entirely with the Minister for Planning, but I did write to the Minister for Planning, asking that he consider it for a call-in, as is appropriate. I sought advice on that as well and I was informed that there was nothing inappropriate about writing a letter saying would he consider it.
For the information of members, the first DA actually ended up—
Mr Coe interjecting—
MADAM SPEAKER: Order, Mr Coe!
MS GALLAGHER: The first DA was in ACAT for well over a year, and that actually dealt with the issue of substance, which was whether or not a facility of this type should be built on this land. It was important to go through the full process, which it did. Indeed, ACAT members headed out to the site for hearing on that location before they determined this.
The second DA, which is the DA that the Minister for Planning called in to provide the certainty that was needed on this project, related to the siting of the facility, not whether or not the facility could be and should be located there, which was the more substantive issue that had raised controversy within the community, particularly with the local landholders. That went through the full ACAT process, including lengthy appeals, and, I think, was resolved very transparently and openly in public hearings.
MADAM SPEAKER: A supplementary question, Ms Porter.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video