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

None . . Page.. 667 ..

It might be rejected by members because they do not feel that it answers key questions about the management or the future of the park or its accessibility to the public or whatever it might be. I do, however, say that we will be attempting that task because we feel that it is important to make sure that we have that opportunity.

I might observe that this is something of an object lesson. Had the option of ANCA not been on the horizon as of yesterday, certainly the motion that was originally circulated would have passed in this place - there is no doubt about that - and the option of ANCA being considered after that point would have been, in my view, not on the list of possibilities.

Mr Moore: You would have come back to us, Gary. That would not have been a problem.

MR HUMPHRIES: That may be, but I would say that we would have been very hard pressed even to have those discussions with ANCA on the basis of such a motion. I hope that we can accept that kind of approach - that, if members feel concern, they should indicate that they want these things brought back to the Assembly, and it will happen. If the Government irritates the Assembly to the point of its biting back, I can assure members that that will be more by accident than by design.

MR WOOD (4.58): Mr Speaker, I will support this motion which has been moved by my colleague. I rather preferred the original version, but I will go along with the consensus that seems to be reigning in this chamber today. Throughout the debate there were comments such as, “We can do better”. It is always true that we have to try to manage better, to operate our systems better; but I want to put on record my respect, gained over three years plus as Minister for this area, for the current management of Namadgi. It is very good. Do not think for a minute, Minister - perhaps you did not suggest this - that it is an isolated body out there, that we do this alone. There is a great deal of shared knowledge in Namadgi about all national parks in Australia. They are a very proud and coherent group. The Namadgi management is not operating on its own; it is operating in the knowledge of what is happening everywhere else. It is also the case that there is a deal of movement between bodies. I went through some of the places in the Northern Territory and found people who had worked in our own national park or our own nature park. The park management is good. They would agree that they can always do better, and they constantly improve their professional approach. They constantly contact other park managements. They are in constant communication to see that they do get better.

I hope that Mr Humphries has dropped the notion that we just want to do something more cheaply. I repeat my disturbance at the idea that the only thing the Government has in mind is how to do it more cheaply. This is a vital part of Canberra, and economy is not the only factor we have to look at. If I thought this exercise was simply to make savings, I would be very disturbed. Mr De Domenico, as a member whose electorate encompasses Namadgi, would also be concerned, I am sure. I repeat that my purpose in rising is to point out to this Assembly the dedication - - -

Debate interrupted.

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