Page 1880 - Week 09 - Thursday, 19 October 1989
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Government for funding for this Assembly which were rejected and in respect of which counter-offers were made? Is it not a fact that in the most recent round you requested approximately $4.5m, which offer was rejected, and $4.43m approximately was counter-offered by the Government? Who ultimately has the final say in the setting of the Assembly's budget - you or the Government?
MR SPEAKER: I take that point, Mr Humphries. The Government does allocate the funding for the Speaker's use for the Assembly at this time. However, we will look to an alternative arrangement so that the Speaker's budget is outside the control of the Government as, I believe, is the case in the other place. This is something that we will look to when the time permits. At this time the Government certainly does control the allocation of funds, but I must point out that it is in agreement with the Chief Minister. So it is a debatable point and agreement is reached on what is an acceptable limit to the funding available.
Cosmetics Manufacturer
MR WOOD: Mr Speaker, I address my question to the Minister for Industry, Employment and Education. I refer to an article in today's Canberra Times under the heading "$10m Revlon Project for Site in Hume", which article contained reference to the lack of an environmental impact statement. Can the Minister provide an assurance that all approvals for the development of the Revlon facility at Hume have been handled according to the customary processes?
MR WHALAN: I thank Mr Wood for that question. I think that the people of Canberra and this Assembly have good cause to be proud of the achievements in having the Revlon plant established at Hume and I would hope that our support for economic development and the creation of an employment opportunity is unanimously supported within this Assembly.
There has been a range of individual processes leading to the approval of Revlon's commencement of work on the site. In particular, there has been an assessment of the handling of effluent produced on the site. Stage 1 of the development has been approved on condition that the necessary works are carried out for the processing of that effluent on site. Stage 2 of the development has not yet received design and siting approval, and when such an application is received environmental requirements will be similarly addressed.
It should be emphasised that the development is taking place in an area planned and set aside for industrial development of this type in respect of specific environmental problems which could arise, such as noise pollution, air pollution and water pollution. There is legislation in place that clearly spells out the developer's responsibilities, which will be enforced. In
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .