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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2003 Week 1 Hansard (19 February) . . Page.. 226 ..

MRS DUNNE (continuing):

We should look at the planning that is going ahead and the planning that is being suggested by the Gungahlin Community Council. Really, what we are seeing could be characterised as tinkering at the edges. But the essential concept of street-based shopping, with an active shop frontage, will not be changed. If we went out tomorrow and built the proposal put forward by the Gungahlin Community Council, we would still have all of that. We are not throwing out 10 years of planning. For Mr Wood to stand up here and wave around the report of the Planning and Environment Committee, circa 1995, and say, "This is what we are planning to do,"is rubbish and duplicitous. It is not fair to the people of Gungahlin that you would do that. I ask: why are you so sensitive and why are you so afraid of consultation?

The take-home message today for this minister and this government is be collaborative, be a little bit generously spirited and look at what has been said. Interestingly enough, the first meeting took place at the Southside Community Centre-you could not even have one in the north when probably 1,000 people lived in Palmerston. While the basic thrust of that consultation may still be valid, it is outdated. No-one has a problem with saying, "Well, this is what we thought, but as the community has grown and as 9,000 households receive our newsletter and we have sparked debate on these things, perhaps there is room for tinkering at the edges."And this, Mr Speaker, is what we are talking about-that there should be just a little bit of modification, just a little bit of collaboration, just a little bit of give and take on both sides in this debate.

It is a low day for the Labor Party when we come into this place and hear this minister in his hectoring style tapping the table and gesticulating and counting off how many people have been consulted. He thinks "If I hector enough I will have my way."If he cannot have his way by hectoring, he will have the audacity to come in here and say, "Well, I can see I'm going to go down on this, but I don't care. We are going to oppose it and even if you vote for it we will not abide by the motion of this place"-the place where we come together as the elected representatives of the people of Canberra and the people of Gungahlin. Mrs Burke represents the people of Gungahlin, I represent the people of Nicholls, Mrs Cross, Ms Dundas and Ms Tucker represent the people of Gungahlin, and you stand here and say, "We don't care-

Mr Corbell: I represent the people of Gungahlin, too. Ms Gallagher represents the people of Gungahlin, Mr Quinlan represents the people of Gungahlin.

MRS DUNNE: You supposedly do as well. But you don't care what the majority of this place says. You are saying, "We will flout what this place says."This is a low day for this government and they should hang their heads in shame. This is a low day when you can say, by way of interjection to Ms Dundas, "You are wrong, you are wrong. I, Simon Corbell, the fountain of all wisdom, know everything."

What we are asking to be accepted here is collaboration and consultation. Mr Corbell stands with his hands in his pockets and postures, as he does-he does it very well; it is all very well scripted-and says, "Ours is comprehensive, ours is scientific and yours isn't, so yah boo, sucks."Get a life Mr Corbell. This is not how you run consultation in this town. This is an intelligent community which wants to be treated like an intelligent community. People do not want an arrogant minister to stand here and say, "I'm right and you're wrong, ner, ner ner."This is the quality of the debate that we have had from this minister tonight.

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