Page 1216 - Week 04 - Tuesday, 23 March 2010
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
suggests that that consideration does not go on—it does go on. It suggests that the government considers it—it is already doing it; it does it every day.
For Ms Le Couteur’s benefit, ministers do not get up in the morning and say, “Now, which part of town am I going to ignore this week?” This is not the Liberal Party government; this is the Labor government. We do not say: “Which developer’s pockets do we want to fill with cash? Who will we give it to this week?” No, we do not do that. That is the sort of thing Mrs Dunne promotes all the time; we do not.
The sad part about this report is that there are some good recommendations in it, but they are diminished by this set: paragraphs 4.31, 4.32, 4.34 and 4.35. It says here that Green Square will not be funded by the ACT government as it is not consistent with the government’s policy in relation to sustainability and water use. Well, the government’s policy on sustainability and water use is something that has been applauded by the crossbench in this place in the past. If you have got an area in the town which just plain will not grow, you do something else about it. Who is going to pay for the water for this small patch of ground? Ms Le Couteur says, “Oh well, the Kingston one and the Ainslie one are different.” She is saying they have only got a one-year lease. Whose fault is that? It is not the government’s fault. Also, I have to tell you that there are a bunch of traders in Green Square that have been there a little bit longer than a year. They were there just after Hawke’s Butchery closed. That is how long they have been here.
This is nonsense, and I think Ms Le Couteur ought to think long and hard about her position on the southern cemetery. I would ask her, in fact, to revisit that policy, and she might like to ask the government to include it as an option. It is the choice. Let us not muck around with people’s emotions. Let them have the choice of how they wish to treat the bodies of their relatives. Do not impose one’s own beliefs on them. Do not do it just because it is the only patch of ground. There should be room for all of that; not just one. (Time expired.)
Question resolved in the affirmative.
Auditor-General’s Report No 3 of 2009—government response
Statement by minister
MS BURCH (Brindabella—Minister for Disability, Housing and Community Services, Minister for Children and Young People, Minister for Ageing, Minister for Multicultural Affairs and Minister for Women), by leave: I wish to make a statement regarding the Auditor-General’s performance report No 3 of 2009 entitled Management of respite care services. The report was tabled in the Assembly on 19 May 2009 by the ACT Auditor-General. The ACT government welcomed the report and the recommendations it made for improvements to government-provided respite services for people with a disability. It was seen as an important mechanism to ensure that our services are being delivered responsibly and meet the needs of our community.
Overall, the Auditor-General found that the service provided by Disability ACT met the safety and respite care needs of people with a disability. The report also stated that the department is doing many things well. For example, the policies and procedures
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video