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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2003 Week 9 Hansard (27 August) . . Page.. 3297 ..

MR STEFANIAK (continuing):

To support the motion does not advance us anywhere-it does not involve any commitment from the government. It does not have the government saying, "Yes, all right. We will build this motor sport facility. We will honour the commitment we made to the dragway people in 2001."

If they said that, I would be happy, but they are not saying that at all. They are asking us to note this. Yes, I think we should note it-but there is no need for it to be moved as an amendment. The opposition will be opposing the amendment, and I encourage the crossbenchers to do so, too. Then let everyone vote-put their money where their mouths are, as it were-in respect of the substantive motion.

Ms Tucker has a consistent position on this. I do not agree with her-I never have. She has always been consistent, and she has probably found me always fairly consistent, about motor sport since she has been in this Assembly. I respect her position, even though I totally oppose it. I do not agree with it, but it does not surprise me.

Ms Dundas, I know there is strong support for motor sport. Nevertheless, by accepting this amendment, you are not showing that effectively; you should vote against this amendment. I think you misunderstand one thing-that the government has to be able to get the land before it can provide money to build a facility. That goes without saying. You cannot build it in thin air. That is implied.

Don't use that as an excuse to vote for Mr Quinlan's amendment because, quite clearly, implicit in my motion, if we are calling on the government to do something, they must have the land to put it on. A block has been identified-and, by the way, the lease expires at the end of 2005. So there are a number of things the government can do.

What we want today is to get a commitment from this government or, failing that, to get the majority of this Assembly to accept that the government should build a motor sport facility in the Majura Valley-that being the best possible site-and obviously it has to get a block of land.

Mr Quinlan's amendment is interesting, but it is information only. It puts off a proper commitment to the motor sport facility. That was a commitment this government made-a commitment on which numerous people voted for them and a commitment they are now seeking to weasel out of. All they will do, it seems, is commit to finding a block and maybe buying it, but nothing more-although, in listening to Mr Hargreaves, he said, "We will get the dragway in some form or another."

Mr Corbell said something about working with the dragway people for ongoing financing of the facility. Does that mean he is going to build the facility? If the Labor Party, or two members of it, want to say, "Yes, we will build the facility,"why not vote for my motion? That gives a full commitment to: yes, we will build the facility. If you oppose that and vote for these weasel words in the amendment, it is fobbing off that necessary commitment.

In closing, I want to address a few other points members raised during the debate. Mr Quinlan talks about the opposition changes on all this. Actually, I believe the opposition has been fairly consistent on motor sport, all the way through-I certainly have been, as even Mr Hargreaves acknowledges.

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