Page 1226 - Week 04 - Wednesday, 29 March 2017
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
I am very pleased to see that the community has engaged with the panel at a number of the drop-in sessions plus, of course, the electronic engagement via email on the proposal itself and the EIS.
As Ms Le Couteur mentioned, some extra documents were provided by the FOY Group to the panel recently and they are titled a consolidation EIS. We saw some additional information within that package. I have asked the panel to extend their consultation period with the community and that now will close on 10 April. So we are looking for the public to consider that extra information that has been provided by the FOY Group in that EIS. (Time expired.)
MS LE COUTEUR: Minister, I asked and was told in February last year that the government was not aware of the reasons why the FOY Group did not receive approval to operate in New South Wales from the New South Wales EPA. Have you now asked why and what did you find out?
MR GENTLEMAN: I have left that with the directorate to look at and, of course, the panel to look at as well. I have not had feedback on the operation in New South Wales. My understanding is that a development application did not go forward. So it will be interesting to receive the information back from the directorate on the proposal that they had in New South Wales and the difference here.
Of course, we do see proposals go forward in other jurisdictions that are not successful and that then come forward in the territory, and vice versa as well. There are particular areas that could affect whether or not a proposal is approved in the jurisdiction. It could be the location. It could be any number of things. As soon as I get more information on that I will be happy to come back and provide that to the Assembly.
MRS DUNNE: Minister, did you receive notice of Ms Le Couteur’s question and, if so, when?
MR GENTLEMAN: No, not specifically of Ms Le Couteur’s question. I was prepared for the question, though, because notice of the extra work that the FOY Group had put forward to the panel was given to me yesterday.
Public housing—Holder
MR HANSON: My question is to the Minister for Housing and Suburban Development—she might have been able to guess it was coming—and relates to the government housing project in Stapylton Street in Holder. Minister, on 27 March it was reported that “the quiet area did not have the appropriate services, public transport or infrastructure that would benefit vulnerable public housing tenants”, that “there are a whole lot of safety issues” and that “the community will not accept the destruction of the heart of our community”. There are all quotes.
Minister, could you explain the differences in the services between the new site proposed in Holder and the services, transport and infrastructure that would have been available on Northbourne Avenue?
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video