Page 3299 - Week 09 - Wednesday, 19 August 2009

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

How disgraceful! Of course he then tried to back away from that judgement but these comments on the board remain.

The minister treated the former chairman, Mr Brian Acworth, and the former deputy chairman, Mr Mark Love, disgracefully. After first denying on ABC radio that he had asked these two board members not to reapply, he admitted that he had asked both these members not to reapply.

I also cannot let a further matter pass. In the estimates hearing on 27 May 2009, the minister claimed that the former board of the EPIC Corporation had accumulated reserves that had largely been from government appropriations. This is an unsubstantiated slur on the former board and, of course, the former board has not been given the opportunity to respond to this allegation.

The recent history of the Stanhope-Gallagher government’s treatment of the board of the Exhibition Park Corporation is appalling. And this was capped off by the government-orchestrated public service takeover of the board as from 1 July. Canberra, and indeed the region, deserves much better than this for such a significant community asset.

The Assembly recognised the value of the corporation in managing the strategy for and activities at Exhibition Park and rejected the abolition of the board of the corporation. This bill ensures that the intention of this Assembly cannot be circumvented by the government. I commend the bill to the Assembly.

Debate (on motion by Ms Gallagher) adjourned to the next sitting.

Water and Sewerage (Energy Efficient Hot-Water Systems) Legislation Amendment Bill 2009

Debate resumed from 17 June 2009, on motion by Ms Le Couteur:

That this bill be agreed to in principle.

MR BARR (Molonglo—Minister for Education and Training, Minister for Children and Young People, Minister for Planning and Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation) (10.28): Before I speak on the substance of the bill, I would like to register my surprise and disappointment at the appallingly poor process that the Greens have chosen to work through in the formation of this bill.

Not only have they not sought any input from industry bodies that represent those who build houses, but there has been no considered process for community input into this bill. Where were the community meetings? Where were the workshops with interested individuals and businesses? Where was the consultation with the actual people who will be affected by this bill? Where is the regulatory impact statement? Where is the social impact statement? Indeed, is there any evidence that anyone other than Ms Le Couteur and the Parliamentary Counsel have had any input to this bill?

Let me give you a snapshot, Madam Assistant Speaker, of some of the concerns that industry have expressed. The Master Builders Association told my office today that

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