Page 2912 - Week 09 - Thursday, 18 August 2005

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

the CCTV and the evacuation plan measures. That is what the supplementary question was aimed at.

Secondly, Mr Speaker, may I say that, in relation to the issue of “the knee jerk and populist response” comment that Mr Stanhope made, that was an issue in the question. He stated that that was in relation to the issue of ID cards only. I would like to point out that that is not right. I would like to—

MR SPEAKER: You are entering into the debate on the subject.

MR PRATT: So I cannot clarify that issue at this point, Mr Speaker?

MR SPEAKER: No. You cannot start a debate about the issue, Mr Pratt. I give leave for personal explanations for members to explain where they have, in this case, personally been misrepresented, not about how one or another person in this place has described a particular issue. This is not a debating device. You cannot use it as a debating device.

MR PRATT: Fair enough, Mr Speaker. Then I shall leave it at this point and simply say that the nature of my supplementary question did not allege or imply that nothing has been done by the government or the services about counter-tourist measures. I will deal with the other issue separately.

Investment prospects

Discussion of matter of public importance

MR SPEAKER: I have received letters from Ms MacDonald, Mr Mulcahy and Mr Seselja proposing that matters of public importance be submitted to the Assembly. In accordance with standing order 79, I have determined that the matter proposed by Mr Seselja be submitted to the Assembly, namely:

The outlook for Canberra’s social and commercial appeal to investors and residents.

MR SESELJA (Molonglo) (3.42): The city of Canberra, designed and planned from its inception by Walter Burley Griffin, an architect considered one of the foremost exponents of his craft at the time, has a unique place in our nation. Not only is it Australia’s national capital, home of government and the central focus for our democracy, but also it is the hub of the vibrant, productive and growing region that forms part of the south-eastern region of New South Wales. It is home to some 320,000 residents who for many years enjoyed a standard of facility and living that was the envy of other Australian cities, mainly due to the economic contributions of the federal government in a time prior to self-government for the territory.

At that time this city was a public service town. Most of its residents came here for government jobs and, as the home of a number of key defence personnel, there was also a somewhat transient population as postings and transfers took people to other cities after brief stints in the ACT. The city is now faced with different challenges. With the advent of self-government, the responsibility for our roads, our infrastructure and our services has switched to the ACT government. We have a growing number of small and medium—sized businesses here in the ACT and we have a growing pool of self-employed workers. That has assisted with expanding our population and our revenue

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