Page 938 - Week 06 - Wednesday, 26 July 1989
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
I would make it clear that the position regarding the development of the community facilities was clearly established in all documents. The Government never tried to con the ACT community; it was always clearly expressed that we would have to wait until the premium was established before the extent of the development could be known. (Extension of time granted)
So I await future developments with interest. The other point to make is the need for a response to the arts community about the provision of a greatly increased number of performances to fill those theatres, from the Canberra community generally. So the performances and attendances will have to be lifted considerably. That is a very difficult task.
I also considered the argument about jobs. I have to say I reject the argument that we need building construction just to provide jobs. For me, that is like saying, "Let's chop down some more forests to keep jobs", and I do not accept that. It is fine to have construction, but that construction must be based on the need for the structure and the facilities being provided. My experiences in this were rather like those of Mr Humphries. This exercise made me focus my thoughts where I had not particularly done so before. I believe that, in the period before the establishment of the select committee, my views to those who were interested were well enough known. I was not wildly excited about the issue. It was known that I was marginally against the proposal, not being particularly concerned about gambling but being concerned about crime, corruption, and the moral and social aspects.
However, my views too have been modified. I believe that, if we look at the casino in the context of what we already have in the ACT and, more than that, what the ACT community supports and accepts, then the development of a casino is supportable. Further, if we look at this development in the context of the package that we are offered and the benefits for convention centre, for tourism, for arts and for the general enhancement of what happens in Canberra, the proposal is supportable.
MR DUBY (11.19): Mr Speaker, I rise to endorse the words of Mr Wood, as Mr Humphries has done, and also those of Mr Jensen. We on this committee set out on a task which we knew would be thankless to a lot of people, because the establishment of a casino development in the heart of Canberra is a very contentious issue. I repeat the sentiments of Mr Wood, in the sense that at the start I think some of us were marginally against gambling and some marginally for. I personally could not have given a hoot either way whether there was a casino in Canberra. But we were charged with the task, and the task was to determine the suitability of a casino in the heart of Canberra. Many people gave submissions to us - many people whose feelings are very strong on this issue, both for and against. I
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .