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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2001 Week 1 Hansard (14 February) . . Page.. 184 ..

MR CORBELL (continuing):

It is a pity that this issue has come down to that because it is much too important for Mr Smyth to hide behind semantics. I remind Mr Smyth of what I said in the debate last year:

I do not want the minister to go away from this place thinking he can undertake a review and come back to this place and say there is no need to change it-

that is, to change variation 114-

... I would like the minister, if and when he undertakes this review ... to know that that is the very clear wish of this place.

That wish, of course, was to not allow a development intensity of more than one block in the Old Red Hill precinct. Mr Speaker, this is now about two issues. It is about what this Assembly meant and the failure of the minister to implement the will of the Assembly even though he said that he would. That certainly was duplicitous; there is no doubt about that. Further, it is about saying that heritage values are more than just about what you can see. They are about what is important and significant nationally and internationally and taking steps to protect it. I thank members for their support and I urge the Assembly to support the motion.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Postponement of notice

MR SPEAKER: The Clerk has received written notice from Ms Tucker pursuant to standing order 109 setting the next day of sitting as the day for moving the motion listed as private members business notice No 3 relating to a significant tree register.

Administrative Appeals Tribunal (Amendment) Bill 1998

[Cognate bills:

Coroners (Amendment) Bill 1998

Oaths and Affirmations (Amendment) Bill 1998

Supreme Court (Amendment) Bill (No 2) 1998]

Debate resumed from 10 March 1999, on motion by Ms Tucker:

That this bill be agreed to in principle.

MR SPEAKER: Is it the wish of the Assembly to debate this order of the day concurrently with the Coroners (Amendment) Bill 1998, the Oaths and Affirmations (Amendment) Bill 1998 and the Supreme Court (Amendment) Bill (No 2) 1998? There being no objection, that course will be followed. I remind members that in debating order of the day No 3 they may also address their remarks to orders of the day Nos 4, 5 and 6.


(8.48): Mr Speaker, I am very pleased to be speaking on these bills this evening. The issues raised by Ms Tucker go to the heart of the contemporary view of Australia and indeed of the people of the ACT when it comes to the issue of self-

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