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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1999 Week 10 Hansard (14 October) . . Page.. 3135 ..

MR STEFANIAK (continuing):

In addition to these various formal consultation processes, the Federal Golf Club consulted with the local community in preparing the proposal, with a series of public forums being held in 1997. The issues raised during this consultation were summarised and responded to in the preliminary assessment. I think everyone is well aware - certainly, the Government is - of the range of views within the community on the proposal. The Government considers that the consultation has been more than adequate. The issues have been canvassed and examined fully many times over.

There are some more concerns in the community. I have seen a number of people from both sides in relation to this proposal. I have seen the plans. One of the big concerns - I was delighted to hear my colleague Mr Smyth comment today on this issue - was the fact that Brereton Street may be extended. I can understand community concerns on that. I think they are real and entirely appropriate. I was glad to hear Mr Smyth say that there is no intention by this Government, and I would certainly hope by any future government, to extend that street. I think a lot of the significant concerns - very valid and real concerns - of a number of members of the local community have been allayed by that. He was very positive.

I think the land swap involving the Canberra Nature Park is a very big issue as well. The proposal is obviously far better than and far different from the 1997 proposal. Again, that 9.221 hectares would become a significant community asset. Being well aware of the lane down to the Federal Golf Club, I think the offer by the club to develop a footpath there to assist local residents in terms of ease of access to the nature park is a sensible and welcome step.

All in all, Mr Speaker, the matters have been canvassed very thoroughly. A number of real concerns raised by the community have been addressed. In these issues you never can please everyone. I have great sympathy for Mr Osborne's view about not wanting to be involved in planning decisions. They are among the most controversial that ever come before this place, but it is the duty of members and the duty of governments to assess proposals. In this instance, a number of real concerns have been taken into account, and I agree with my colleagues in government that, in the circumstances, there is no real reason now why the proposals should not proceed further.

MR RUGENDYKE (12.15): Mr Speaker, it has been suggested that the majority of the members of the Standing Committee on Urban Services failed to consider all the evidence before the committee and assess it on its merits. I reject that suggestion outright. We did look at all the evidence. Evidence was presented from two very opposing positions and it was necessary to look at all the evidence in context and consider it fairly.

Mr Speaker, the developments at other golf courses were not necessarily taken into consideration during our deliberations, but the precedents that have been set cannot be ignored. We have seen developments at other golf courses, and in that context it would be unfair to deny the Federal Golf Club the opportunity to follow the same path, providing it meets the necessary requirements. After assessing all the evidence before the Urban Services Committee, I am satisfied that the Federal Golf Club has met the

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