Page 4264 - Week 14 - Tuesday, 29 November 1994
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Mrs Carnell: But it is the same $90m.
MR LAMONT: What happens, you silly thing? That current $90m in terms of manufacturing goes to Sydney or Brisbane or Melbourne or Taiwan or Hong Kong or Japan. What is being proposed by John Morphett, the chief executive of Anutech, is that that work should be done here in the ACT; but they do not have the opportunity to do so. Why? Because existing companies with which they may be able to joint venture do not have either the capacity in their existing establishments or the lateral integration between them and other organisations to provide that opportunity. What did Anutech say, as a member of CRATMA? It said quite clearly, "Government, we need a facility to allow it to develop".
Mrs Carnell: Why did we have to put residential development on Fern Hill?
MR LAMONT: This shows not only your stupidity, Mrs Carnell, but also your ignorance. You do not listen to your colleagues on your side of the Assembly. You also do not take account of debate.
Mr Humphries: I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. Members of the Government have all day today been hurling abusive comments towards Mrs Carnell - "stupid", "silly woman", "ignorant", "eeny, meany, miney, mo", and things of that kind. I think there is a point where the tenor of this place is lowered by that kind of personal abuse. I am quite prepared to accept that Mrs Carnell should face criticism. It should not be personal criticism, and I would ask you to draw the Minister into line on the tone he adopts in his remarks.
MADAM SPEAKER: Perhaps you could take that into account, Mr Lamont.
MR LAMONT: Thank you, Madam Speaker. I become somewhat frustrated. One would normally expect the Leader of the Opposition, even after an obviously enjoyable dinner break, to understand business and industry, particularly the one we are talking about in the ACT. It is obvious from her comments, Mr Humphries, that, like you, she does not. Simply, the position being put is that organisations such as Anutech, CEA Technologies and Auspace all believe that what you require in the ACT is the integrated fertilisation of industry in this sector, and that to do it in the disparate locations currently provided is not the way to encourage industry to develop in the ACT. It was the suggestion of business in the ACT that this park be established. They said two things. First of all - - -
Mrs Carnell: They also wanted Yowani to go ahead.
MR LAMONT: If you do not want abuse, do not interject. The simple fact is that business in the ACT has clearly said that the Canberra region needs an advanced technology manufacturing facility where the cross-fertilisation of business will not only lead to a greater retention of our intellectual property in the ACT but also encourage business to establish here. To do that, we need as a community, as a government, as an industry, to establish the CRATMA, or Symonston, facility. That is what this Government has given - - -
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .