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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 09 Hansard (Thursday, 19 August 2004) . . Page.. 3944 ..

Mr Speaker, if I may conclude: I think it is important to restate the Liberal Party’s policy in relation to motor sport. The highlights of that policy are that we will give one-off funding of $8 million over two years to construct a dragway in the Majura Valley—$4 million in 2004-05, $4 million in 2005-06. I didn’t see any policy at all from this Labor Party or anything in the budget for the other areas of motor sport, apart from $200,000 to reseal and upgrade the current hill climb track at Fairbairn Park.

We’ll ensure a fair noise credit regime for motor sport. A minimum of 30 credits per year will be provided to the Fairbairn Park complex and a further minimum of 10 credits a year to the track run by the Canberra Motor Sports Club to the west of Fairbairn Park, plus $100,000 for a study of siting a motor racing circuit in the Majura Valley near the dragway. That’ll cover economic costs and identify an area. Indeed, the police driver training area would be a good one if we ever get that back. ASIO’s a bit of a problem there, I understand.

There’s a lot of potential for motor sport in Canberra. This government’s really missed the boat in terms of that. I would urge it—it’s not too late—to get off its arse and do something and I urge everyone in this Assembly to do the same.

MR QUINLAN (Treasurer, Minister for Economic Development, Business and Tourism and Minister for Sport, Racing and Gaming) (3.59): Can I thank Mr Wood for the contribution which he made to this debate because I think it was very important. Let me expand upon exactly what Mr Wood was referring to.

It was the previous Liberal government that allowed the lease of the dragway to lapse. It was, in fact, the previous Liberal government that set up a noise credit system that allowed for a reduction each year and put motor sport on short-term leases. All the signs were there that the Liberal government wanted to strangle motor sport. You were strangling it with noise credits; you were not assisting it with leases. It was this government—it was Mr Wood and I—who changed the noise credit regime because it was effectively strangling the sport. That’s what you left in place.

Just to pick up on a couple of points: you were concerned about the renewal of the lease on section 51. Bill, I think you would know that the leaseholder has rights and you can’t resume a lease unless it is being resumed for a public purpose. Unless you were certain that you were going to build some public facility—that government was going to build a public facility; it has to be a public purpose—then that leaseholder has rights. If 51 was to be resumed at a later date, then it just has to be resumed at the evaluation; otherwise that leaseholder—

Mr Stefaniak: And it costs more money.

MR QUINLAN: Of course it would have cost more money. But that leaseholder had rights.

Mr Stefaniak: So why didn’t you do it last year if you were fair dinkum?

MR QUINLAN: You would have trammelled those rights, would you, Mr Stefaniak? No, you wouldn’t have. I’m sure more sensible people in your party would have made

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