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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2010 Week 14 Hansard (Wednesday, 8 December 2010) . . Page.. 6028 ..


was almost as if on a motion on Tralee, seeking tripartisan support on the issue of Tralee, the development of Tralee, the word “Tralee” was not uttered once in three presentations by the Liberal Party.

In fact, the intent of Mr Seselja’s amendment, as both Mr Barr and Mr Rattenbury pointed out—Mr Rattenbury quite cruelly, I thought, but very fairly—was effectively to completely negative Mr Rattenbury’s concerns in relation to Tralee, the essential purpose of the motion. I think it was probably out of order. So we do that.

Lastly, my amendment goes to the suggestion around the establishment of a commission. It is a proposal that we are not adverse to but would like an opportunity to further explore. So I commend the amendment.

MR SESELJA (Molonglo—Leader of the Opposition) (8.52): We will not be supporting the amendment. Before I speak to that, Mr Stanhope is very touchy, I think, and has been throughout this, on his lobbying efforts. And it is not surprising that he has come back with what is partially just a self-congratulatory amendment about how wonderful the ACT government is because they have regularly made representations to the New South Wales and commonwealth governments on the proposed development of Tralee. How have they gone? Perhaps a more honest assessment would be that they have continually failed in their lobbying efforts, whether it was a federal coalition government or a federal Labor government.

I would note that the Labor Party and the Greens just voted against supporting the people of Gungahlin, the people of north Canberra, in having the noise abatement zone extended. They voted against legislative protection. We put forward a better path and the Labor Party and the Greens have voted against it. That is what the Labor Party and the Greens just voted on. They actually voted to say to Gungahlin residents, “Bad luck if you do not live in a noise abatement zone.” The rest of Canberra can live in a noise abatement zone but apparently not half of the people of Gungahlin, and certainly the growing areas of Gungahlin.

They voted against protection for the people in the inner north. In relation to the broader community, they voted against legislative protection. So the Labor Party and the Greens have stood up in this place and have voted against legislative protection. Ms Bresnan could not even bring herself to actually speak to the issue, as a member for Brindabella. But the Labor Party and the Greens in their votes have actually voted against legislative protection.

So we will not be supporting the amendment from the government. If they were fair dinkum about it, they would actually support something the commonwealth can do right now. And what the commonwealth can do right now is legislate to protect the people of the ACT. We will push for that. And we look forward to getting support from across the chamber eventually.

MR BARR (Molonglo—Minister for Education and Training, Minister for Planning, Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation and Minister for Gaming and Racing) (8.55): I was not going to rise again in the debate but Mr Seselja, in his attempts to fiercely spin on this issue, has prompted me to rise again to observe that in


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