Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2016 Week 2 Hansard (17 February) . .
sent to the ACT Gaming and Racing Commission—one in regard to community contributions, another in regard to the Canberra Woden Tradesmen's Union Club. The advice is that the body of evidence considered by the royal commission in making their findings was only very recently provided to government. The Gaming and Racing Commission board is reviewing all available information and will make recommendations to the government on the referred matters following consideration of the information. If breaches of the criminal code are identified, these will be referred to ACT Policing. In November 2015 the Gaming and Racing Commission board commissioned a review to commence early this year on the effectiveness and efficiency of the community contributions process.
Planning and Development (Land Rent Payout) Policy Direction—Disallowable Instrument DI2015-308
Statement by minister
MR GENTLEMAN (Brindabella—Minister for Planning and Land Management, Minister for Racing and Gaming and Minister for Workplace Safety and Industrial Relations): Madam Speaker, while I am on my feet, I have a statement of correction. In regard to the debate on 11 February on the disallowance motion on the Planning and Development (Land Rent Payout) Policy Direction, Mr Coe raised the circumstances of a former owner of an affected property in Ainslie. My response was:
I will speak once again to the individual that Mr Coe raised during his conversation in respect of the buildings left on the block. It was a request of that owner to leave those buildings on the block.
I had previously been briefed that the former owner had made that request—that a shed and a garage remain on the block—but the asbestos task force has since advised this information was incorrect. The decision not to demolish the shed and garage was made by the asbestos response task force. The goal of the demolition program is to eradicate loose-fill asbestos by removing affected houses.
I am advised that in the majority of cases the demolition instructions will encompass the affected house, structures attached to the house and soil from the works zone only with a view to containing costs and retaining, so far as possible, the established gardens and landscaping that are features of these blocks in established Canberra suburbs. Where possible, structures that are shown to have no evidence of Fluffy contamination are left on the block. The task force has informed the individual of this position and why it was the case that the structures would remain on her site at the end of 2015 prior to her receiving the resale offer.
It is also worth noting that the shed on the block in which commentary referred to as contaminated is actually made from bonded asbestos sheeting. That shed was tested by a licensed asbestos assessor engaged for the demolition and treated in accordance with the relevant recommendations. As we all know, bonded asbestos is a ubiquitous building material in Canberra's older suburbs. Provided it is maintained and is worked on safely, it poses a low level of risk.
Next page . .
Previous page. . . .
Speeches . . . .
Contents . . . .
Sittings . . . .