ACT Legislative Assembly Hansard


Advanced search

Next page . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Sittings . . . . Search

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1996 Week 4 Hansard (17 April) . . Page.. 1005..


MR HUMPHRIES: Is this Northbourne House that we are talking about again, or something different?

Mr Moore: No; the one on Condamine Street, opposite the school.

MR HUMPHRIES: Mr Speaker, I do not know what my response will be because I have not yet seen the recommendations of the LAPAC. I would be very interested to see what it has to say. This is a matter which, obviously, the Government has to take into careful consideration because that part of Canberra is very sensitive - perhaps more sensitive than any others. There are two developments in that part of Turner which are sensitive. I assume that this is one of those two - either the one which was put forward by Messrs Tokich - - -

Mr Moore: That is the one.

MR HUMPHRIES: In that case, I am looking forward to seeing what the LAPAC recommends and to taking into account what it has to say.

MR MOORE: I have a supplementary question, Mr Speaker. Mr Humphries, assuming that the information I have provided to you is correct, are you going to take your LAPAC recommendation seriously?

MR HUMPHRIES: Yes is the short answer to that. If Mr Moore means will I automatically accept it, the answer is no. I made it very clear that these are, as the name suggests, advisory committees. They are highly influential in the way in which the Planning Authority and the Government make decisions; but they do not have, as it were, a right of veto in respect of planning decisions. If they are concerned about this development, I want to know why and what is the basis for it. If those concerns are valid and borne out, then they will be met with a rejection of the proposal.

Australian Public Service - Job Cuts

MS REILLY: Mr Speaker, my question is to the Chief Minister, as Minister in charge of industrial relations. Chief Minister, yesterday you accused the Federal Labor Government of retrenching 18,000 employees, leading to a cut in - - -

Mrs Carnell: There is not one. There is not a Federal Labor Government. It is the former Federal Labor Government. They lost by a long way.

MR SPEAKER: Order! You are on your own now, Ms Reilly. It is up to you.

MS REILLY: I am quite happy to add the word "former". The Chief Minister implied that all or most of these were in the ACT. Figures supplied by the Australian Bureau of Statistics show that between 1989 and 1995 the number of Commonwealth Government employees in the ACT went from 50,200 to 54,300. Will you now apologise to this house for once again making misleading statements?


Next page . . Previous page. . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Sittings . . . . Search


If you have special accessibility requirements in accessing information on this website,
please contact the Assembly on (02) 6205 0439 or send an email toOLA@parliament.act.gov.au
Accessibility | Copyright and Disclaimer Notice | Privacy Policy
© Legislative Assembly for the ACT