Page 1513 - Week 05 - Thursday, 12 May 1994
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
not want an impact on them; but, whatever policy we adopt, there are going to be winners and losers. There is going to be a cost-benefit to be taken into account. You cannot always demand that the cost be attributed to local people while the supposed community at large gains the benefit, or perhaps an individual or a group who are doing a development. An even spread of costs and benefits has to be taken into account.
Madam Speaker, I would encourage the Government to continue the negotiation process with people when things are going to have an impact on them. There is still room for them to move, still room for them to carry on discussion. This is an excellent way to begin the discussion; but it is the first part of the discussion, not the concluding part of community consultation and negotiation.
MR WOOD (Minister for Education and Training, Minister for the Arts and Minister for the Environment, Land and Planning) (4.55), in reply: Madam Speaker, I thank members for their contributions and general support for the papers, albeit that there were some criticisms. I take it that there is support for the very strong priority that the Government gives to environmental protection and environmental issues, to the nature of Canberra. The community at large says that our environment has to be the best that we can make it.
Members have had a deal to say on a few items, but, notably, community input. Ms Szuty mentioned that, as did Mr Westende and Mr Moore. I think that the documents I have given to the Assembly demonstrate how serious we are about community input. Mr Moore, I think, finished his speech a little differently from the way he started it. He said, at the end, that these documents are a part of the process, a stage. At the beginning he said, "These are just words". I would be severely castigated if I came into this Assembly with everything complete. Yes, there are a lot of words there. There is also a demonstration of a great deal of activity. I think the approach that the three members took was, "Let us have this discussion; let us have the words as part of a long process of discussion".
There is clear evidence, first, that we in this Government care about our environment. Secondly, in establishing the way we are going to care for it, we are talking very extensively, and in considerable detail, to the community. Mr Moore asked how many responses we had to the environmental statement. We had 26, and I think a couple more are to come. They were broad responses, covering all aspects of the strategy statement we put out. Mr Moore also said that many people in the suburbs do not get involved until they are immediately affected. That is certainly the case. There is a great deal of interest. Those 26 submissions would certainly reflect more than 26 people, because most of them came from the conservation groups, for example, that are a very important part of the debate in the ACT and are representative of a great number of people.
Mr Westende suggested that there was a lack of consultation with the private sector. I would contest that point. I do not agree with it. When we send out these documents we send them to every darn organisation that has a listing in the telephone book. They do get these documents and they are invited to make a response - and they do. For example, the Canberra Business Council and the Canberra Chamber of Manufactures, as well as legal groups, are represented on the reference group we have established for the integrated environmental legislation. That demonstrates that they have been in there commenting and are happy to play a continuing role.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .