Page 4420 - Week 14 - Thursday, 1 December 1994
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
It is certainly going to keep a lot of our existing high-tech companies a little happier than they are now, and perhaps more likely to stay in town, because they will be able to get a cheaper rent than they would be able to get normally. That will enable them to move out of areas such as Mitchell and move into an area close to Fyshwick, which seems to be the area where they wish to be located. Also bear in mind the fact that it was the industry who said, "Yes; this is a particular area of land which may be suitable for what we need". For all those reasons, I am afraid that on this occasion we cannot support the motion.
MR WOOD (Minister for Education and Training, Minister for the Arts and Heritage and Minister for the Environment, Land and Planning) (11.09): The Chief Minister has given a very good account of the Government's position on this issue. I thank the Opposition, first of all, for making a careful examination of the issues. I commend careful examinations to you in all circumstances. Following that careful examination, as I hear from Mr De Domenico, they will not support Ms Szuty's disallowance motion either.
It was said by the Chief Minister that RAPI, the Royal Australian Planning Institute, misunderstood what this was about. That is true. I welcome a submission by RAPI. They do not get involved very much in submissions and in planning. Perhaps that is understandable because many of them are involved in planning at officer level or at academic level. On this occasion the submission missed the point. These will be large, modern industrial buildings that simply are not appropriate to the development that we have in mind at Gungahlin; they simply will not belong. We are not about to have big buildings with no windows; no matter how attractively designed they are, if that can be done. RAPI missed the point, as they did recently on one other matter.
We note what the Queanbeyan City Council says. Let me indicate that we have a good working relationship with the councils around Canberra. There is quite a deal of regional planning and a great deal of cooperative effort under way. But that is in broad terms. It does not mean that in specific circumstances there is not a little competition between the councils; in this instance, between Queanbeyan and the ACT. Above all else, if an industry wants to locate in the ACT, that is appropriate. From time to time we try to attract industries. Sometimes, if we are anxious about an industry going, we will try to stop that. That is the fair and reasonable way to go. The very important issue of the environment and the survey have been adequately discussed by the Chief Minister. The manufacturers - highly competent, well-organised manufacturers - want this park. The Government and the PDIC have responded to that sensible approach. This will be a great success. I look forward to activity on that site very soon.
MS SZUTY (11.12), in reply: The most important point that I need to make in response to the speakers who have spoken to the motion is that the fundamental question is that we do not know the size of the estate that we are going to end up with. At this stage we might end up with only stage 1 proceeding, in which there are nine sites available for the advanced technology manufacturers, or we might end up with stages 1, 2 and 3, which will mean that we have a much larger site to consider. Alternatively, we might end up with a combination of those two. We simply do not know at this time, and we will not know until the surveys on the eastern lined earless dragon have been carried out in December and January. I am not saying that I oppose the concept per se; I am opposing the concept at this time, because I do not think the Assembly has available all the information for us to make a considered decision in relation to this issue.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .