Page 4086 - Week 11 - Thursday, 21 September 2017
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
concerns that relate to and affect Canberrans every day. That is what we did on private members’ day. We had another motion about light rail that did not get debated yesterday because we ran out of time. We come to Thursday and we do not have a lot of business on the notice paper, so, to fill up a bit of time and make sure that we do not finish up before lunchtime, rather than talking about local issues, which is what we should be doing, they have brought in a motion about federal issues.
If the members opposite and those on the crossbench are so desperate to discuss federal issues, why do they not get in their car and pop up to the federal parliament? It is not that far away. There are many politicians up there who I am sure would love to discuss federal issues with them. But here in this Assembly the Canberra Liberals at least are very focused on discussing local issues, ones that the Assembly actually have some control over.
This Assembly is not the right place to debate these federal issues. We will not be supporting the motion or the amendment. West Block has been vacant for more than two years. The Chief Minister has already outlined how private investment can provide an opportunity to revitalise these properties and ensure that their significant heritage values are maintained. The National Capital Authority amended the National Capital Plan to allow for a broader range of uses of these buildings, to encourage important and necessary revitalisation of the precinct.
It is important to note that during the consultation phase there were no public submissions received on those changes to the National Capital Plan. That is right: there were no public submissions received, not even from the Greens, who now want to bring this to the ACT Assembly to debate. They did not bother to submit in the consultation phase on the change to the National Capital Plan.
To me, it is a bit of blatant hypocrisy. Think about the debate we had yesterday about the Mitchell traders and the light rail stop. The minister said quite clearly that they should have participated in the consultation process. I am sure members all remember that debate. If they wanted a tram stop, they should have participated in the consultation process. They should not have taken it for granted that they would get one, despite the fact that there was one marked on the little map that was out for consultation.
So there are completely different approaches here. On the one hand, you have to participate in the consultation if you want to affect the outcome. On the other hand, we did not participate in the consultation but now we want to talk about the outcome on something that is not even relevant to the ACT Legislative Assembly. Really, it is just ridiculous.
Heritage values will continue to be protected through provisions included in the sales contracts and crown leases. These buildings are already on the heritage list. Heritage laws protect any future owners from taking away the heritage value of the parliamentary area. Just because something is heritage listed does not mean it should have to sit empty and in a state of ruin.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video