Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2016 Week 6 Hansard (4 May) . .
would not need to expend $160 million on a plebiscite, and a small proportion of that money could be made available to reverse the efficiency dividends for our national cultural institutions.
That would be a practical way that we could save our national cultural institutions from the efficiency dividend and not waste $160 million on a plebiscite for an issue that can be resolved by a free vote of all members of the federal parliament. Were a free vote to be granted after the election, marriage equality would be a reality in Australia. (Time expired.)
MADAM SPEAKER: A supplementary question, Ms Burch.
MS BURCH: Treasurer, what will be the impact of the federal budget of last night on the Australian public service here in Canberra?
MADAM SPEAKER: I think I am going to have to rule that question out of order because the Chief Minister is not responsible for the Australian public service. On reflection, the previous question was out of order because the Chief Minister is not responsible for national institutions such as the Portrait Gallery, and I am going to rule that question out of order.
Manuka Oval—development proposal
MR DOSZPOT: My question is to the Chief Minister and Minister for Economic Development. Minister, when were you first approached about an unsolicited proposal about Manuka Oval and the surrounding section?
MR BARR: In 2015, Madam Speaker.
MADAM SPEAKER: A supplementary question, Mr Doszpot.
MR DOSZPOT: Minister, were Ms Burch and you aware of the proposal to redevelop the Manuka Oval precinct when you proposed the Manuka land swap?
MR BARR: The LDA proposed the Manuka land swap as part of the government response to the 2013 Manuka Oval master plan that did identify that site following the fire that occurred at the Services Club site. That site was identified as part of the 2013 master plan and it was made public at that time and presented to the Inner South Canberra Community Council as part of the government's thinking in relation to Manuka Oval development. That master planning process began in 2009. So, four years of work, four years of consultation and four years of consideration of the issues led into that 2013 master plan. And, at that point in time, it identified not only a range of upgrade options for Manuka Oval but also two sites outside the existing oval footprint but inside the Manuka circle that could be explored for supplementary development associated with upgrades to the oval. That was public in 2013.
MADAM SPEAKER: A supplementary question, Mr Hanson.
Next page . .
Previous page. . . .
Speeches . . . .
Contents . . . .
Sittings . . . .