Page 3334 - Week 08 - Wednesday, 17 August 2011

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


advised the former Chief Minister, Mr Stanhope, that the ecological values of Throsby justified a significant proportion of the land being set aside for conservation.

These expert groups presented pragmatic options that advised that the high conservation values of the area could be maintained if only the lower half of Throsby, that adjoining Horsepark Drive, was developed. ACT government officers are now continuing to gather further information to inform the government’s planning decision. A survey for the striped legless lizard is planned for the lower parts of Throsby this spring.

As I am sure you will agree, Mr Assistant Speaker, the government has already undertaken the initial steps towards a comprehensive environmental assessment and is committed to a full and thorough assessment as is called for in part 2(a) of this motion.

In relation to part 2(b), it is the government’s intention to refer development at Throsby to the commonwealth under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act. This will occur after all reasonable measures have first been taken to avoid and minimise impacts on the nationally significant environmental features. This will also place Throsby in the strategic context of other development and conservation actions occurring within Gungahlin. Referral under the EPBC act will demonstrate that the viability of features of national environment significance, such as the superb parrot and golden sun moth, are being maintained and enhanced across Gungahlin.

In my amendment, I am proposing two changes to Mr Rattenbury’s motion. The first clarifies the fact that there is work to be done to the ACTMAPi software to enhance its capabilities, including the ability to incorporate a wide range of layered information that could be made available to the public and the fact that this work is underway.

My second amendment recognises that the location of outer asset protection zones should be determined on a case-by-case or location-by-location basis, taking into consideration bushfire risk and fuel reduction regime to ensure that there is no adverse impact on environmental values.

Mr Assistant Speaker, in general terms it is worth reaffirming the government’s intentions. It is already well underway in its further assessment of the environment values of Throsby. It will be making a decision about what future development should occur in Throsby following these detailed assessments. A range of referrals under the EPBC act and the other work outlined in my amendments are already well underway. I commend the amendment to the Assembly.

MR SESELJA (Molonglo—Leader of the Opposition) (10.57): The Canberra Liberals will not be supporting the amendments or the motion. I think for the people of Gungahlin, it is “here we go again”. It is a case of here we go again. Those who remember Save the Ridge will see the beginnings of what is happening here in relation to Gungahlin. We heard it from Shane Rattenbury. He does not believe Throsby should be developed at all; not at all. This is the beginning of that process. This is the beginning of the process that would stop Throsby from being developed at all. Of course, it will be used to prevent any future duplication of Horsepark Drive.


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