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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2003 Week 2 Hansard (4 March) . . Page.. 452 ..

MR CORBELL (continuing):

Quite frankly, today, the success of Yerrabi 2 is a strong endorsement of the government's move towards public land development activity. That move has, I think, highlighted the gap in the market, where people were unable to buy direct from the government, or faced increased costs because of the relationship between land developers and certain builders. It will cut out the middle man.

We have made land available direct to the public on a fair basis. In this process, I look forward to its continued rollout, to provide greater choice for homebuyers in the ACT, and indeed a greater return for the community on the asset it owns.

Economic discussion paper

MR STEFANIAK: My question is to Mr Quinlan. Can you advise the Assembly who was on the invitee list for yesterday's launch of the economic white paper? We have been advised that no representative from the government's business advisory board or any of the government's advisory boards were in attendance. Is it true that none of the important stakeholders such as the Chamber of Commerce or the Canberra Business Council were invited?

MR QUINLAN: Mr Stefaniak, if we are talking about a launch, there was not one. All there was were TV interviews that happened to be conducted outside at Regatta Point, as opposed to a press conference or whatever. It was just a case of giving some background-a little theatrical licence on the part of my media adviser-putting the broad expanse of this beautiful city behind us, only to find that I would have been a silhouette because the sun was behind me, so I had a couple of trees behind me. But that is life.

MR STEFANIAK: I ask a supplementary question. It seems that no-one was invited. For such an important event concerning what will eventually be the government's blueprint for business and a strong economy in the ACT, why was the invitee list so thin, and why did you do what you did, Mr Quinlan?

MR QUINLAN: We tried to get embargoed copies of the paper-discussion paper, by the way-out to stakeholders so that they knew about it. We made arrangements with the Canberra Times, which in recent times has been terrific in their willingness to advise people. Initially we had a tourism review and this time we had the discussion paper. The Canberra Times have already put the discussion paper out. It was in the paper on Monday morning. So the paper was probably launched pre-dawn, as it went out with the Canberra Times. There was television interest, with television looking for a different angle. That was facilitated during the morning.

Public Transport-Gungahlin

MRS CROSS: My question is to the Minister for Planning, Mr Corbell. Minister, Gungahlin is the most poorly serviced transport area of Canberra and, despite this, your government seems to have dropped the ball on the area of the greatest need. Can you please explain not only to this Assembly but also to the people of Gungahlin whether they are a priority of your government; and, if not, why does it appear that the inner-north of Canberra has now attracted your favour? In your answer, Minister, could you

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