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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 13 Hansard (3 December) . . Page.. 4423 ..

MR CORBELL (continuing):

we have is not with the ability of this Government to deal with their Federal colleagues in Parliament House, because we know they get along with them quite well. They probably agree with them on quite a few things, even though they pretend to do otherwise in this place. What we have a problem with is when they try to deal with the formal processes that have been agreed upon between the two governments, processes like the National Capital Authority. That is the concern we have. You cannot cooperate. Your two governments do not cooperate when it comes to the formal processes that are in place in relation to planning in the Territory, and that is what we are saying in this motion today.

I notice that there is a deathly silence over there because they obviously cannot refute it in any way. People in this city deserve to see a national capital which is developed as a symbol of what good planning can mean for a community, for a society, for a fair society, for a fair community; but that is not what we are seeing from this Government. That is why it is important in the debate today to highlight some of the problems that this Government has created for itself. Indeed, the example of the land grab that was announced yesterday is only the latest example of that. It is important that we make that point. It is important that we say that good planning means cooperation, not the trivial, political grandstanding that we are seeing from this Government today.

MS McRAE (12.02), in reply: No-one is willing to defend Mr Humphries, I see.

MR SPEAKER: No. Do not provoke.

MS McRAE: Now we see exactly what this Government thinks about its own failure. Mr Humphries's defence was, "Look at what we have done with the 999-year leases". Exactly. Mr Humphries's idea of how to deal in an open partnership with the planning authority is to sneak off to quiet, secret meetings behind closed doors and stitch up deals that no-one has a say in. No-one in the ACT has any idea of the implications of 999-year leases. Nobody has seen what the implications might mean for Federal land and for local land. No-one knows the implications of one type of lease over one part of the Territory and a different type of lease over another, or what it means in common law, what it means in regulations or what the implications are for the planning Act.

Mr Humphries's answer is that it is just enabling, but one must note the timing of it. It is no surprise that it is going through now as enabling legislation. The Federal Government clearly thinks it is an absolute joke because they are putting it through at a time when there is absolutely no way that it will go through the lower house and the Senate in time for the next Assembly to do anything about it. This is Mr Humphries's idea of how they are working cooperatively. He completely ignores the major issues that have been raised in debate. Mr Humphries's idea of dealing with debating issues is just to say, "What is she talking about?". What a wonderful way to deal with key issues that have been put before him and that have been explained! All it does is make him look even sillier than I think he really is.

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