Page 4361 - Week 14 - Wednesday, 30 November 1994
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Was there not a question earlier today about competitiveness? Yesterday, or earlier this week, in particular, the Leader of the Opposition was saying, "No competition. Do not do anything. Do not even consider it". As the week went on, she did modify that stance a little. I think, yesterday, we said quite clearly what is happening. The Government, a little while ago, initiated a retail study. As well as that, all the activity that Mrs Carnell did not seem to think about, that is automatically triggered because of this very large proposed expansion, will be put into place. That will all happen. It will tease out all the issues. That is the appropriate way to go. It is the way that this very sensible Government is going.
MR KAINE: Madam Speaker, I ask a supplementary question. As I suspected, the Minister could not answer the question, because he made no reference at all to the question in his answer. Since he does not know the answer, he cannot refute the statement that, for every 3.9 people who lose their jobs in suburban supermarkets, only one will find a job in the major supermarkets. Does he not at least concede that there is valid justification for a comprehensive review before he goes ahead and authorises any expansion of the Tuggeranong Hyperdome?
MR WOOD: Where have you been? What have you been smoking, which is more to the point? You did not hear what I said yesterday and you did not hear what I said today. Mr Kaine, I had those same figures quoted at me. I know of them. Other people have quoted other figures. There are more figures there than you can jump around. But there is one other point. The Leda proposal - and I am not promoting it, nor am I opposing it - will concentrate supermarket activity. It will also provide a whole range of other shops - small business shops. I think they quoted 100 small business shops, which employ very high numbers of people. The point to note is that there are so many ifs and buts and pluses and minuses in employment, as in other things, that it warrants the very serious consideration we have always given to it, and not the instant dismissal that Kate Carnell is proposing.
Royal Life Saving Society
MR BERRY: My question is to the Deputy Chief Minister. I know that he will be keen to answer the question and that he will not be blocked by his colleagues, because we have no fear of the answer. Madam Speaker, the question I would like to ask is: Has the Government refused funding to the Royal Life Saving Society for 1995 for the alleged continuation of patrols at Canberra swimming holes?
Mrs Carnell: It should be a quick answer.
MR LAMONT: Mrs Carnell, it will be about as long as the stunt that Mr De Domenico and Mr Stefaniak organised this morning.
Madam Speaker, it has been indicated to the Royal Life Saving Society over a number of years that the process by which they were seeking grants would need to change and that those grants would not be able to be achieved in future years through the community service grants program. As a result, the Royal Life Saving Society put forward a grant
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .