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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1999 Week 13 Hansard (7 December) . . Page.. 3943 ..

MR QUINLAN (continuing):

I must say the people of the Causeway will be pleased to read that in the Act. Perhaps they will now be permitted to purchase the homes in which they have lived for years under the banner of social responsibility. Of course the last, but not least, parameter is ecologically sustainable development.

We believe that the provisions to bring joint venturing to the Assembly for approval are a move in the right direction as well. I do have to give notice of an intention to move amendments in the detail stage. I understand that the Bill will be adjourned before we embark upon the detail stage and those few amendments will bring the legislation up to the standards that have been applied in this place in recent times.

MR HUMPHRIES (Treasurer, Attorney-General, and Minister for Justice and Community Safety) (10.41), in reply: I thank the Opposition, Mr Speaker, for its support. Clearly we have a major enterprise, a major project for the Territory, on the Kingston foreshore. There has been disagreement about that project, particularly about the land swap in the past. But I hope there is a realisation that we have here a major opportunity to both shape the appearance of a very important, very high-profile part of our city, with respect to the Kingston foreshore area, and to create a great deal of economic activity that will be of benefit, particularly when measured in terms of jobs. I hope the Kingston Foreshore Development Authority will be a vehicle for that to occur and that it will enjoy a measure of support in the work that it undertakes across the chamber and across the community.

MS TUCKER: I seek leave to speak.

Leave granted.

MS TUCKER: We are supportive of the Kingston foreshore development although perhaps not exactly for the same reasons as the Government. This area should never have been used for industrial purposes and the original Burley Griffin plan for Canberra showed this area as being residential. Unfortunately, decisions were made by the early government planners to end the railway line there, rather than extend it to the north side, and to build the city's powerhouse there. This facilitated the location of other industrial and municipal activities on this site that unfortunately became a barrier between the rest of Kingston and the lake.

These activities have since become derelict, so the site is now ripe for redevelopment, particularly to allow greater connection to, and use of, the lake foreshore. The revitalisation of this area is long overdue, but the Greens have always said that the redevelopment of this central, unique and prominent site should be a showcase for innovative, ecologically sustainable urban development.

The Government has mouthed similar words. I even note that the Government has included, without my prompting, the promotion of ESD in the functions of this new authority, which has saved me from putting up my usual amendment on this matter. For this I congratulate them; however, I believe that their rhetoric has not always matched their actions in relation to the Kingston foreshore. First, there was a design competition for the Kingston foreshore in 1997. Originally the interim authority was not going to include in the competition brief that the entries had to demonstrate best practice environmental management. It was only

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