Page 290 - Week 01 - Thursday, 24 February 1994

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .


Can the Minister at least indicate how soon we can look forward to a new site for motor sports? We realise that, wherever the site will be located, some will complain, but at least we should endeavour to achieve as much consensus as possible. Would it not be appropriate for the ACT Government to get its act together? Let us not waste our time on ad hoc matters. Finalise section 12 of the Noise Control Manual and give us some indication of when the motor sports might be relocated to their new home.

Madam Speaker, will the Minister provide a new section 12 on motor sports, written according to Australian Standards, and incorporate it in the Noise Control Manual, or at least see what standards should be incorporated? Then I am sure that we will find no opposition to those amendments proposed by the Minister. We would have absolutely no problem with agreeing to the passage of this Bill.

MS SZUTY (4.18): I wish to address the Bill very briefly. This amendment Bill permits the introduction of conditions when granting exemptions and states that an amendment to the Noise Control Manual is a disallowable instrument, which is a good thing. Appeals will also be able to be made to the AAT in relation to the imposition of conditions or exemptions, which is also a good thing. It seems to me that the Noise Control (Amendment) Bill aims to achieve greater flexibility in noise control administration. This will meet both the needs of people wanting to hold events which will create noise and the needs of local residents wanting to continue to enjoy the peace and quiet of their neighbourhoods. Madam Speaker, this legislation is good legislation and it is worthy of the support of this Assembly.

MR DE DOMENICO (4.19): Madam Speaker, as Mr Westende said, the Liberal Party will not be opposing the legislation. It is technical legislation which we think is good legislation. Perhaps the Minister might want to confirm the facts. This is about offering global protection to people outside the ACT. Complaints have been received from, I think, people from the Ridgeway. Mr Westende quite adequately explained that there seem to be no complaints about the Sutton Park distance from the Ridgeway, but there are complaints about other things that go on. We could be offering New South Wales citizens more protection than is being offered to them by their own Government. Perhaps we need to look at that. One would hope that Mr Fahey will say that Mr Wood and the ACT Government are being kind to New South Wales residents in terms of the protection offered here. When Mr Fahey wants to do something about the environment in Queanbeyan, he may have the courtesy to ring Mr Wood and ask for his opinion.

MR WOOD (Minister for Education and Training, Minister for the Arts and Minister for the Environment, Land and Planning) (4.20), in reply: Madam Speaker, I certainly think I could look after the people of New South Wales better than Mr Fahey and I am prepared to offer him advice on any occasion; but I do get the gist of what Mr De Domenico is saying. I do not think it is the case technically that we are tougher here than New South Wales is on measures there.


Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .