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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2001 Week 9 Hansard (23 August) . . Page.. 3270 ..

MR MOORE (continuing):

you describe it-in order to say, "It may well be possible that there is something we have missed. There is something here that does not add up and we can resolve the problem for you in an administrative way." I think that is a very sensible way to approach it because sometimes mistakes are made in a particular case and they can be resolved easily without the person having to go through that process.

My understanding is that there were a relatively small number of people who approached the department, something in the order of 100, as I recall. Of those, a very small number went on to appeal to the tribunal, as is their prerogative. There is no disincentive for people to do it. It is just an attempt to see whether we can resolve their particular problem in the first place.

Mr Wood, it seems to me that what Housing put in place was an attempt to resolve these problems. When the letter went out to people to indicate to them that the rents would rise if they were not on a rebate, that offer was made to them, as well as being reiterated by me publicly.

Belconnen pool

MR RUGENDYKE: My question is to the sports minister, Mr Stefaniak, and relates to the proposed Belconnen pool development. As well as the specifications for the construction of the pool facility, did the tender documents include ancillary aspects of a complementary nature that could broaden the uses of the final development?

MR STEFANIAK: I am not quite sure that I understand the last part of the question, but I think I do.

Mr Rugendyke: Did the tender allow for other ancillary things?

MR STEFANIAK: The government wanted to see what we were told by the competition policy report. The public contribution in that, which we wanted to see as a minimum, was a 50-metre, eight-lane pool-I was glad to see that the proposal is, I think, for 10 lanes, which gives it lots of possibilities-with seating for 800 people, a sound system and a warm-up pool of 25 metres which has to have at least three lanes. I understand that the winning proposal is much bigger than that. There are lots of other things which the developer will be putting in as well. That is exactly what we wanted to see. The preferred proponent, obviously, had to beat other proponents and the more things they could add for the benefit of the community, the better.

My understanding is that the additional items, apart from what we wanted-the 50-metre, eight-lane pool and those other three items-include basketball courts, a hydrotherapy pool and a larger 25-metre warm-up pool. I think there is also provision or potential for slides. I do not know whether that is going to happen or is essential, but there is provision for it. There will be a number of other additional facilities there as well. I was particularly pleased to see on the plans, in making my announcement, that there was provision for indoor basketball and other indoor sports as well. I do not think that was in any of the other proposals in the saga of the aquatic centre. There are some excellent additional facilities there which certainly will benefit the community.

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