Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 02 Hansard (Wednesday, 3 March 2004) . . Page.. 651 ..
accommodation, to potential exposure on the urban edge to bushfire risk; and whilst that might not be an issue for more standard residential, it is an issue of concern for an aged care facility where evacuation of residents, if necessary, is more problematic because of their age and infirmity.
So, Mr Speaker, there are a range of issues, including the ones that Mrs Cross has mentioned in her question today.
Mrs CROSS: Mr Speaker, I ask a supplementary question. Minister, what were the reasons that you gave to Madison Lifestyle Communities during your first meeting with them for not supporting the proposed development?
MR CORBELL: I would need to check the record, Mr Speaker. It was some time ago but I am happy to check my correspondence with Madison and advise the Assembly accordingly. What I can say is that certainly the issues to do with development of the site were of concern. Certainly issues to do with the location of that facility and some of the problems that it raised, which I have just mentioned, were of concern. I think the only other issue that may have been a concern was, to the best of my knowledge, the notion of using public recreational land for housing development. It is something which the government in opposition took a particular view on. We are remaining consistent in that regard.
Mrs Cross: So you will take it on notice? Is that right Simon? The supplementary?
MR SPEAKER: Thank you, Mr Corbell. I call Mr Pratt.
Mrs Cross: On a point of order, Mr Speaker: I just did not understand. Is Mr Corbell taking the supplementary on notice?
MR SPEAKER: I think he answered the question.
Mrs Cross: No, he did not answer the question. He said, “I will get back to Mrs Cross.” I want him to officially confirm that he is taking the supplementary on notice and that he will get back to me with the answer.
MR SPEAKER: Well, if he said he will get back to you.
Bushfires—declaration of a state of emergency
MR PRATT: My question is to the Minister for Urban Services. A Canberra Times report today on a cabinet briefing on 16 January 2003 reads:
One of the note-takers recorded “how significant the chance that a [state of emergency] will have to be declared” and next to that “40-60 per cent”.
Minister, given that extremely alarming assessment, why did you continue to be on leave? Why did you not report back to duty to monitor closely the emerging circumstances and why did you not, given the grave fire intelligence assessment, call or recommend the calling of a state of emergency? Additionally, why did you not give