Page 2855 - Week 08 - Tuesday, 5 August 2008

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

in Belconnen is the most popular and most successful. I acknowledge, indeed, that it was Mr Stefaniak, in government, who actually set the initial parameters for the operating models utilised in the CISAC model, which has proved to be enormously successful. It was initially under the stewardship of Mr Stefaniak as minister for sport, and it is a model that I would be particularly interested in seeing at least pursued in relation to the Gungahlin pool. At this stage, I do not wish to be pre-emptive but we have indicated, in relation to the Gungahlin pool, we will ensure it is delivered, if we are re-elected, in the next term.

Having regard to the other very significant capital works that will be undertaken on that site as a result of this government’s commitment to the people of Gungahlin, our commitment to the future for the people of Gungahlin—the enclosed oval, the most advanced and most significant college within the ACT, a CIT, and now, of course, an aquatic centre anchored with a 50-metre pool; an incredible suite of infrastructure which will be delivered, the same as on the site in Belconnen, as a result of this government’s commitment to the people of Gungahlin, the commitment to ensuring equity—we, in government, have ensured, with due fiscal responsibility, that we have the capacity to fund the level of capital infrastructure that will now be provided to the people of Gungahlin. We have committed $67 million to what will be the best secondary college in the ACT. We have committed $18 million to what will be—

MR SPEAKER: Order! Come back to the subject matter of the question.

MR STANHOPE: It is all on the same site. It really is quite relevant.

MR SPEAKER: This is about the pool. Stick to the pool.

MR STANHOPE: The pool will be on this site. It will be built.

Mr Smyth: How much?

MR STANHOPE: That has yet to be decided. That depends very much on the model. We would expect, as a minimum, the contribution which was made by the government to the Belconnen pool. I think it came out in the end at $12 million. Of course, if that same exact model were delivered, one would expect a sum of that order, allowing for an escalator, having regard to the fact that the Gungahlin site may be slightly smaller than the Belconnen site. In the context of the actual cost, what the government has committed to is an absolute minimum of $10 million, subject to the model, with an expectation that it may be $20 million. That is our promise. The pool will be delivered. But it will be delivered in exactly the same way, of course, as the Belconnen pool—the model for the pool in Gungahlin will be, I believe, a private-public partnership.

In relation to Belconnen, the government committed $12 million, I believe—$12 million to that project—and there is no reason to expect we would commit any lesser amount, accepting of course an adjustment for an escalator in costs since that time. This is a commitment by the Labor Party that, if re-elected, we will continue the process we have already started and already funded to design a pool for Gungahlin. We will carry through, once that design and those studies are completed, in negotiations with the Gungahlin community and the private sector, to deliver

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