Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Sittings . . . . PDF . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1995 Week 06 Hansard (Wednesday, 20 September 1995) . . Page.. 1587 ..


They were everywhere. I know that it was not the case 18 months ago when I was last there. I ask again: What is the point of preparing this land at Boboyan Pines after the pines have been logged and the stumps removed? The soil will be tilled; it will be right for sowing native vegetation, as it should be; and then to have the weed infestation from this nearby area is a ridiculous waste of money and time. The rehabilitation program certainly needs to go on, but it needs to have a context; and the weed strategy needs to be in place so that what happens in this rehabilitation area actually has lasting effect.

I also believe that it is vital for the Government to actually implement environmental guidelines relating to all aspects of our environment and planning. This includes using the ecologically sustainable development principles, which should cover all materials used for government buildings, as well as design and siting, internal fixtures, fittings and furniture. The fundamental ideas behind ESD include recycling, minimising energy use, sourcing materials from ecologically sustainable processes and protecting ecological communities within our urban areas as well as outside our urban areas. This principle views the recycling of all buildings as an essential element. In 1995 it is absolutely inexcusable to be spending $8.125m to demolish buildings at Acton which probably still have a lifespan of 30, 40 or more years. When I asked the people that appeared before the committee whether any assessment had been made of the cost of refurbishing buildings at Acton, I was told flatly, “No”. That is interesting.

Another real concern that I had about the program was that the Canberra community was being asked to cover the cost of the link between the two courts, when the National Capital Planning Authority requires a much more costly semisubmerged structure. Surely we have to insist that the Federal Government pay the difference between the cost of the link that would be adequate to our community standards and that required by a national standard. That seems like a very sensible idea to me. I am pleased to hear that the Government has been talking recently about long-term strategies; and I look forward to future capital works programs which reflect some kind of strategy very clearly and decisively.

Debate (on motion by Mr De Domenico) adjourned.

DRUGS OF DEPENDENCE (AMENDMENT) BILL 1995

Debate resumed from 22 June 1995, on motion by Mrs Carnell:

That this Bill be agreed to in principle.

MR CONNOLLY (4.21): This Bill is designed essentially to tidy up what could be some legal doubt about the process of dispensing heroin in pharmacies. That was an issue that excited quite considerable debate last year when the then Opposition Leader moved private members legislation to expand considerably the ability for takeaway doses of methadone to be dispensed through private pharmacies in the Territory. The Labor Party then in government had some real reservations about that, but the Assembly voted in favour of the proposal. We do not intend to redebate that fundamental issue here,


Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Sittings . . . . PDF . . . .