Page 3612 - Week 13 - Tuesday, 16 October 1990
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Mr Berry: Who obliged you to do that?
MR KAINE: I note that Mr Berry does not want to hear this, Mr Speaker. He has an ideological mindset about schools. The ACT Government is a responsible government, Mr Berry; not like yours that could not make a decision about anything. You could not make a decision to close the hospital, although it was necessary that we did, and you would never have faced up to the question of closing the odd school, despite the fact that there are 13,000 vacant or unused places in our school system. Taking that whole debate in its context, I think that the Minister is probably quite correct to say that within the system there are some people who are mollycoddled. The answer to that question, in the broad sense, is yes. It is something that this community cannot afford, and it is something that this Government is changing.
Proposed Casino Licence
MR STEVENSON: My question is addressed to the Chief Minister, Trevor Kaine. As the major reason for the suggested granting of a casino licence in the ACT was fundraising, and as much of that money was going to come from tourists, particularly from New South Wales and Victoria, in light of the fact that Victoria and New South Wales are likely to have their own casinos, has there been a re-evaluation of the income potential and hence the advisability of having a casino? If so, would the Chief Minister be kind enough to let the Assembly know what the result of the re-evaluation was?
MR KAINE: I think Mr Stevenson well knows that for some months now there has been an evaluation of a number of proposals to redevelop section 19 in the city, and that redevelopment includes a casino. Quite clearly, when the recommendation comes to the Government - and Mr Stevenson's question anticipates a recommendation to the Government on the question - the economics of the project will be part of that recommendation.
In asking me to comment on that question Mr Stevenson is anticipating what the evaluating authorities might recommend. I note that the question is predicated on the statement that Sydney and Melbourne are likely to have a casino. I do not know whether they are likely to or not. I think that that is totally irrelevant to the question whether we proceed with the development of section 19 in the city and to the secondary question whether that development contains a casino. I am afraid the question anticipates the recommendation that might come to the Government, and I cannot comment on that at this time.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .