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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2001 Week 8 Hansard (9 August) . . Page.. 2719 ..

MS TUCKER (continuing):

the eastern route and $28 million for the western route. That was a $6 million difference and a 27 per cent difference. We now have $32 million and-

Mr Rugendyke: Somebody made a mistake. Goodness me.

MS TUCKER: Mr Rugendyke thinks somebody made a mistake and we shouldn't worry because mistakes happen. Okay. That is a difference of 27 per cent difference between the two options. That has no meaning for Mr Rugendyke. That is pretty sad. We would have hoped that someone in his position would take an interest in such a dramatic difference of funding because-

Mr Rugendyke: What do we do? Crucify the poor bloke who made the mistake and who apologised for the mistake?

MS TUCKER: Mr Rugendyke wants to know should we want vengeance. This is getting sadder by the minute. He says no, we don't want vengeance. Mr Rugendyke, this is about the expenditure of public funds and you are on a committee to make a decision about the wise expenditure of public funds. If one saw a dramatic change in a funding option and one was responsible, one would want to look at the implications for the public purse; but Mr Rugendyke does not care.

Mr Rugendyke also does not seem to mind that the fauna overpass is no longer there. Mr Rugendyke and Mr Hird have not responded to the need to carefully look at the fact that 534 submissions have been put in about this draft variation. No, they just want to get on with it. Mr Rugendyke and Mr Hird have not bothered to look at the detail of where the new inter-town public transport would meet with two major roads. That clearly is not of importance either.

Then Mr Rugendyke enlightened us as to how he made his decision. He was lobbied by the Save the Ridge group and he gave them two options. Mr Rugendyke is the deal maker. He is in power here. He is, we just heard, in control of all planning in the ACT in terms of this road because he made the decision which the government followed because it was so wise. He put a compromise position to save the ridge. Go east. He will remove the spur. That's generous. A pity about the environmental implications of the eastern route. It doesn't matter what the environmental implications are; there is a bit of a deal done here. He says, "I'll take the spur off and therefore it will be okay."

Mr Moore is squirming, of course, because he has been totally silent on this issue. Mr Moore was telling me before I was even a member of this parliament that he would not go east, but with this pathetic removal of the spur he tries to justify supporting the eastern route.

Mr Moore: You don't know what my position is, Kerrie Tucker, but I tell you what; if anything, you are helping to change it.

MR SPEAKER: Order, please! Ms Tucker has the floor.

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