Page 2478 - Week 07 - Tuesday, 1 July 2008

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

development in Macgregor, when there was a consultation meeting which was attended by up to 250 members of the community, which was advertised in every paper, which the ABC and WIN television attended and at which they interviewed residents and which Mrs Dunne attended. That was only the first of the community meetings.

At the second information session, there were between 150 and 200 members of the public, and they attended an information session at the Kippax library on this particular development. It included community group representatives from the Ginninderra Catchment Group, the Belconnen Pony Club, the ACT Equestrian Association and Pedal Power. Discussions around the concept plan followed. The major discussion that occurred was around potential impacts on existing residents and the protection of their amenities, most particularly amenities in relation to traffic.

We see today this false, concocted nonsense from Mr Stefaniak, embarrassed by his press release of yesterday that there was no consultation. There were two significant public meetings, letterbox drops in every suburb and advertisements in the Chronicle and the Canberra Times, residents were interviewed by both WIN and ABC television, and Mr Stefaniak’s colleague, Mrs Dunne, attended the consultations. There was a site walk along the routes. Despite that, we have this nonsense today.

In Mr Stefaniak’s presentation today on the notion of consultation, he concentrated almost exclusively on a particular example which is false. It is wrong. There were two detailed information sessions—220 to 250 attendees at the first and 100 to 150 at the second. In total, up to 400 people attended the information sessions to deal with this particular development. Yesterday Mr Stefaniak put out press releases, did a television interview as a resident of Macgregor and completely misled the people of Canberra, and today he comes in here and makes the same presentation on a major consultation. It actually makes the case about how well we do consult. The very example that Mr Stefaniak used—roads and traffic issues in Macgregor—to show that we do not consult is wrong. The facts are very different. I have the pamphlet that was distributed by ACTPLA in relation to this particular development proposal and the community implications of it.

Mr Barr: Turn to page 2 and the bit about the roundabout that’s in there.

MR STANHOPE: Yes, that’s right: a locality sketch. It is all there. It is in the documents delivered at the time and circulated throughout the suburb. The advertisements were included in the Canberra Times and in the Chronicle.

Mr Stefaniak: Look at it on the ground, Jon. Go out and talk to the residents, Jon.

MR SPEAKER: Order, Mr Stefaniak!

MR STANHOPE: Mr Stefaniak, you have just made the case for how well this government consults by picking an example that is entirely concocted. There was extensive community consultation on this proposal. I would be embarrassed too, Mr Stefaniak. Very rarely does a member of the Assembly make such a blooper. Rarely is a member of the Assembly guilty of such a serious and embarrassing

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