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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2002 Week 2 Hansard (21 February) . . Page.. 500 ..

MR CORBELL (continuing):

measures identified. Noise effects are not insurmountable. There is scope to adequately address the impact of noise along the western alignment.

Mr Deputy Speaker, a separate environmental impact assessment is also being undertaken on the future transport corridor covering the area from Glenloch Interchange to the Barton Highway. This will draw together the work which has already been undertaken on a range of projects and will identify areas where any additional work is required. It will form the basis for the preparation of a preliminary assessment under the Land (Planning and Environment) Act once a decision is taken on a preferred alignment within the western corridor.

Today, the Liberal Party has argued that I should not be surprised by the Australian Institute of Sport's comments. I was surprised that the AIS was making public comment on the issue. I was not surprised with their views, but I was surprised that they were making public comment. The reason I was surprised was that I met with the AIS early this year and had a detailed and full discussion with the chief executive of the Australian Sports Commission, Mr Mark Peters, in which he outlined the concerns of the AIS. We agreed that we would continue to work through this issue and Mr Peters agreed that at this stage he did not believe it was appropriate for the Australian Sports Commission to be making public comment on the matter. That said, I was surprised therefore that Mr Peters was making public comment, but I understand the context in which he was making it, in that he was making it to a Senate estimates committee.

It is interesting to note that Mr Pratt's motion today directs the government to enter into an urgent dialogue with the Australian Institute of Sport. The government already is in a dialogue with the Australian Institute of Sport. The government has been in a dialogue with the Australian Institute of Sport since early January. As I have indicated, I have already met with Mr Peters to discuss in broad terms the concerns of the AIS. We have agreed that there will be further discussions. I will be meeting with Mr Peters and other representatives of the Australian Sports Commission next week, a long-scheduled meeting, to discuss the issues in more detail on site at the AIS.

It is interesting also that Mr Pratt is suggesting in the motion that we need to start this dialogue. It is interesting because we have already started it-indeed, we started it back in January-and because Mr Peters, in further answers to the Senate estimates committee, was asked by Senator Lundy, a senator for the ACT, "So there is no real outstanding complaint that you have with the ACT government at the moment, given that you were engaged in a consultation process?" Mr Peters said, "No. We are waiting eagerly." Mr Peters told the estimates committee that he had no complaint with the consultation process, so for Mr Pratt to suggest that the government needs to enter into an urgent dialogue is just a nonsense, because we are already in one.

Mr Deputy Speaker, the other point that Mr Pratt raises in his motion is that we need to determine the serious impact, his words, that the planned Gungahlin Drive western route will have on the AIS. That is exactly the point of the discussions that we are having with the AIS. When a government goes to an election with a commitment to do certain things, I think it is very important that it does those things upon being elected. This government is going to do that.

Mr Quinlan: Novel.

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