Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Sittings . . . . Search

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2006 Week 7 Hansard (17 August) . . Page.. 2337..

MR STANHOPE (continuing):

The Live in Canberra campaign, which is a successful program, has given an enormous breadth of exposure to the ACT, to the extent that we have been able to create, particularly in Sydney and certainly throughout New South Wales, a significant awareness of Canberra, the opportunities in Canberra, the lifestyle, what this city has to offer, the fact that our economy is far stronger than economies in the rest of Australia, and that opportunities in Canberra are far superior to those in other places in Australia, most particularly Sydney.

There was a tremendous response, as recently as last week, with 200 families expressing interest in the ACT and the prospect of working in the ACT. Business has invested strongly and heavily in this significant partnership. In my time in government-and I think this would apply also to the previous government-no ACT government-industry initiative has been funded by industry to the extent that this one has. In that context one wonders about the scorn and derision that members of the Liberal Party pour on this campaign.

That is not the attitude and view of the Business Council or the chamber of commerce. That is not the attitude and view of the educational institutions that have funded the campaign. That is not the attitude and view of the Master Builders Association, which has fully supported the campaign and actively participates in it. In other words, this talking down of the Live in Canberra campaign is at odds with what every representative business organisation in the ACT believes and thinks. They put their hands in their pockets and they put their money where their mouths were. They must be as disappointed as I am that members of the Liberal Party continue to undermine this fantastic joint partnership.

MR SPEAKER: Order! The minister's time has expired. Members, when directing questions to Mr Hargreaves, there is no point in referring to him as the minister for transport because that does not exist.

Mr Pratt: I stand corrected.

Planning-EpiCentre lease

MR SESELJA: My question is to the planning minister. Minister, yesterday you stated that you were not aware of a letter from ACTPLA to the LDA regarding potential pre-auction issues over the EpiCentre site. Minister, have you investigated the existence of the letter? If not, will you investigate if such correspondence exists and table it in the Assembly? If not, why not?

MR CORBELL: If I recall correctly-and I will check the Hansard-I think Mr Seselja's question yesterday was: was I aware of any correspondence raising concerns or criticisms of the process. The answer to that question was no. That remains my position.

MR SPEAKER: Mr Seselja, is there a supplementary question?

MR SESELJA: The minister has misrepresented what he said yesterday. Nonetheless,

Next page . . . . Previous page. . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Sittings . . . . Search