Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Sittings . . . . PDF . . . . Video

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2010 Week 04 Hansard (Wednesday, 24 March 2010) . . Page.. 1462 ..


I am sure, if Mr Coe gets the opportunity to speak this evening, he will talk about the issues that we saw at Spence shops. There are a number of issues in the back lane there and a number of maintenance issues there.

We also had the opportunity to visit the Platypus centre at Ngunnawal. That is a newer centre and is in far better condition than we saw particularly in places like Evatt. But we have had it put to us by one of the restaurant owners that indeed there were ongoing issues with vandalism, ongoing issues with break-ins. I have written to the Attorney-General in relation to that to see what can be done in terms of a police presence to try to protect the property at that centre.

I am conscious of the time and I know that a number of other members want to speak. I think we are adjourning at 9 o’clock so I will wrap up in a second. But we have had the opportunity to visit a number of different shopping centres in recent times. We have had a lot of correspondence, much of which we are passing on to ministers in order to try to get action.

This is core business for the government. There is no doubt about it that this kind of maintenance is core business—the maintenance of public areas at local shopping centres, the look of the city, the maintenance of the place is core business. As I say, along with issues such as education, health and law and order, these kinds of services are at the core of what people expect of their territory government.

The final part of the motion talks about ensuring that we manage the funds within TAMS in order to get this stuff done. We have seen the Ernst & Young report which raises questions about the management and the financial oversight in TAMS. That all has an impact. That all has an impact because every time you blow your budget in one area, every time you do not control costs in one area, it makes it harder, it means there is less money to deliver some of these services, to deliver the maintenance. We know government cannot do everything but it is clear that this continues to be a significant issue for people, not just in my electorate but right across the ACT.

I look forward to the contribution of other members who have been hearing from not just shop owners but residents in their communities about these concerns. We put this to the government. We call on them to do this. We will continue to advocate for local residents on these issues and we look forward to getting a positive response and to getting better outcomes for all the people of the ACT.

MS LE COUTEUR (Molonglo) (8.39): This is a very interesting and important topic and I am very glad that Mr Seselja has brought it before the Assembly today. Unfortunately, there is only 20 minutes before the adjournment debate. I will attempt to be reasonably brief so that the debate can be concluded in that time. The Greens agree with the gist of the motion. I suppose it is the use of the word “bungled”—it kind of bungled the motion by saying “bungled” all the time. We are not in a position to agree with it as is. Mr Stanhope has just circulated an amendment. It is an amendment which started off in my office and it has ping-ponged backwards and forwards. In the interests of time there will just be one amendment. I am not going to move one and then Mr Stanhope move another.


Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Sittings . . . . PDF . . . . Video