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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2001 Week 10 Hansard (28 August) . . Page.. 3374 ..


MR CORBELL (continuing):

The Chief Minister said also:

I think members need to understand that this Government is not proposing to build the John Dedman Parkway.

Months before the last ACT election there was a clear statement from the responsible minister that the government was not intending to build the road, and there was no intention in anywhere near the immediate future to build the road. The government did not go to the last election on a commitment to build the road on the eastern alignment. The government deliberately avoided the issue. Mr Speaker, the government has no credibility on that issue. (Extension of time granted.) I thank members.

Mr Speaker, there is the question of the role of the National Capital Authority in this matter. The National Capital Authority has advised that both the western and eastern alignments meet its requirements in relation to its national capital planning responsibilities. Both alignments, according to the National Capital Authority, are acceptable from a planning perspective. So, why the rush, Mr Speaker? Why the desire by the government to push through with this proposal today when we have heard as recently as question time in this place today that the government will not be acting to preclude the alternative alignment? If the government is not acting to preclude the alternative alignment, why is it seeking to vary the Territory Plan now when it has acknowledged that it will allow change to happen if there is a change of government in October? It is a nonsensical proposal from this government.

Mr Speaker, I would like to conclude by reading some excerpts from today's Canberra Times editorial. The Canberra Times editorial today is titled "Gungahlin road: let poll decide", and it says this:

Given the nearness of the ACT election, it does not seem to make a lot of sense for the Government to want to push ahead now with legislation on the Gungahlin bypass. The release of submissions from sporting organisations such as the Australian Institute of Sport, the Canberra Raiders, ACT Brumbies, Canberra Cannons and Canberra Cosmos, all of which support the Government's eastern option, was yet another attempt to justify rushing through this decision ahead of the October 20 poll. Surely, with only seven weeks to go before the vote, the logical thing would be to let the electors decide whether the western or eastern option is preferred by a majority of ACT electors.

The editorial also says, and I will finish on this note:

If the Government thinks this is potentially one last piece of action by which it will be remembered, or even judged, or if it believes there are votes in it, it is mistaken. The residents of Gungahlin will get a road anyway, regardless of what happens between now and October 20. It is merely a question of which type of road and where it will go. ... at this late stage, it should be up to the electorate to decide ...

Mr Speaker, the purpose of my motion today is to ensure that this Assembly does not preclude a future territory government, the government that will be elected after 20 October this year, from proceeding with an alternative alignment. It does not affect the construction timetable, it does not affect the provision of a road to Gungahlin residents, but it will ensure that a future territory government has open to it the road


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