Page 3600 - Week 10 - Tuesday, 26 August 2008

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

told the people of Gungahlin that I would deliver the road so that they could drive out of Gungahlin on that road, and I delivered it to them. But what about these guys? With these guys, it was $32 million for a road going nowhere.

Mr Seselja: On time and on budget.

MR HARGREAVES: There was no beginning and there was no end to it; there was just a little bit in the middle. They reckon they can do the rest of the duplication in two years. Mr Speaker, it takes two years to get the planning proposals done and the contracts awarded. That just shows you that these guys have not got a clue about the processes they would have to go through. It is such a naive question from Mr Seselja, the manager of the A team. He should know better. He should know how long it takes for a project. He would be better placed asking me a question about a particular project, instead of asking why, as he has done. He would not have a single clue.

It seems to me that perhaps we are talking about the glove puppet approach to accounting 101. This sounds to me like the sort of inadequacies that we see coming from the shadow Treasurer. You can’t name one project because you have not looked it up in your budget papers, have you? No. Why don’t you come up with one project? I will see you tomorrow at question time and you can ask me the same question. This time, do it on a project, and I will give you the answer. But at the moment, they can’t. It is a big, broad-brush approach. You are going to get lots of brownie points for doing that! I don’t think so. And as for the terrier over here, the barking irrelevance of Mr Pratt—

MR SPEAKER: Order! Mr Hargreaves, the question was about what you would do.

MR HARGREAVES: What would I do? Mr Speaker, I will tell you very succinctly what I would do: I will, the government will, win the next election, shame these people and go on and deliver the thing in the same way we have done over the last four years, to their eternal shame. The problem, of course, is that we know that at least 20 per cent of them over there won’t be here to see it happen. Mr Speaker, I will put 20 bucks down that one, two, three of them won’t be here. That means four out of six won’t be here to see us do it.

Environment—climate change strategy

DR FOSKEY: My question is to the Chief Minister in his role as minister for energy and climate change. Chief Minister, when the ACT government released its current climate change strategy, weathering the change, it reduced the target for greenhouse gas reduction in 2050 by changing the benchmark year from 1990 to 2000. The 1990 level, at 3,500,000 tonnes of CO2 is nearly 86 per cent of the 2000 level of 4,050,000 tonnes of CO2. Chief Minister, could you please tell me why, in 2007, when the scientific evidence on climate change is more advanced than in 1996 when the first climate change strategy was adopted, your government adopted a strategy which allows the ACT to produce more greenhouse gases, not less.

MR STANHOPE: The climate change strategy that the ACT government has released, weathering the change, builds on all of the successes and lessons of the ACT

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