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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2002 Week 3 Hansard (5 March) . . Page.. 554 ..

MR WOOD: You have raised these further points with me, Ms MacDonald. They are related issues in relation to a neighbouring property. In response, I have sought, through DUS, priority listing for lights, as a starting point, and then community consultation over design changes to the car park, the gates and, perhaps, the possibility of opening up one side of the woolshed.

I understand you are interested in forming a community consultative group, with all the local residents and, perhaps, police and other people. That would be useful. I will consider also what advice they might bring to me.

Gungahlin Drive extension

MR SMYTH: Mr Speaker, my question is for Mr Corbell as the Minister for Planning. Mr Corbell, I refer to a report in the Canberra Times of 27 February this year that the ACT Tourism Industry Council has asked the ACT government to consider the impact of the route of the Gungahlin Drive on both the Brumbies and the Raiders, both of which have substantial interstate followings. The ACT rugby union and the Canberra Raiders both opposed the western route in submissions to the Standing Committee on Planning and Urban Services.

Has your government consulted with the ACT rugby union and the Canberra Raiders about the impact of the western route on them?

MR CORBELL: Mr Speaker, I think it is important to note that the submission as put by the Canberra Raiders and the Brumbies, as part of the Bruce precinct group, to the Standing Committee on Planning and Urban Services in the last Assembly indicated that their position was not the western alignment. That didn't mean that they supported the eastern alignment either. In fact, they were quite clear in their submission that that was the case. So I think it is important to clarify, as I understand it, the record.

Nevertheless, Mr Speaker, clearly all users of Bruce stadium, all users of the AIS, have an interest in this issue. It is the government's intention to ensure that those groups are consulted through the processes involved in varying the Territory Plan in relation to the preliminary assessment process that has to be undertaken. These are statutory processes which Mr Smyth, as the previous minister, would be very familiar with. They are the processes that will be made available to groups such as the Raiders and the Brumbies to raise any concerns that they have.

MR SMYTH: Why has your government not consulted with them, given their interest in this matter? Why have you not had the open and honest process that you promised?

MR CORBELL: Mr Speaker, we have. We did have an open and honest process. It is called work to inform a variation to the Territory Plan, work to inform a variation to the National Capital Plan, work to inform a preliminary assessment. These are all statutory processes that allow people to be involved and to make their comment. That is the process we will be using.

Mr Stanhope: We had an election campaign too, and you lost, with your position

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