Page 5141 - Week 12 - Thursday, 27 October 2011
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
the Greens and Liberals have also had significant correspondence from people saying it was the right decision and to please get on with it. So it is disappointing that we have a motion and amendments that seek to stall that work altogether and to put in doubt the move of Megalo. I have read from their letter to the Greens—I have no doubt to Mrs Dunne also—what they feel about this. They are distressed to discover that there is a motion being put forward which has the potential to delay.
Ms Le Couteur’s amendments refer to ensuring adequate accommodation is provided until permanent accommodation is found. This is an organisation with significant internal resources, significant physical resources, and Ms Le Couteur is just saying, “Well, you can move over there and you can move over here,” with no regard at all to what they have written to her today.
Mrs Dunne: They haven’t written to me.
MS BURCH: Well, Mrs Dunne, the Megalo chair has told us that she has. Further to the point, Megalo believes the ACT Greens should act in good faith in light of passing the capital budget. So the Greens are quite comfortable in not acting in good faith. Megalo programs its activities 18 months in advance. If the process of relocation is delayed, it will throw this into disarray, causing loss of income, reputation and ability. It will lead to stagnation and acrimony. (Time expired.)
MS HUNTER (Ginninderra—Parliamentary Leader, ACT Greens) (11.35): I feel that I have to get up and have a say on the motion this morning. The minister has said that, in conversations with my colleague Ms Le Couteur, Ms Le Couteur did not want this to go to an inquiry. Quite frankly, that is right; the Greens did not want this to go to an inquiry, because we did not even want it to get here. It should not have got here. The consultation process should have been done properly in the first place. Ms Le Couteur has said quite clearly this morning that we are retrofitting a consultation process onto the back end, and that should not have happened. It should not have happened because—
It being 45 minutes after the commencement of Assembly business, the debate was interrupted in accordance with standing order 77. Ordered that the time allotted to Assembly business be extended by 30 minutes.
MS HUNTER: If that consultation process had been carried out at the front end with all of the people who had a stake in this then Megalo would not have been put in this terrible position. They should not have been put in this position.
I would like a guarantee from the minister in this chamber this morning that Megalo will have accommodation from June 2012. She has put this all onto: “Their accommodation will be at risk because they won’t be moved into the Fitters Workshop.” As has been clearly put by Mrs Dunne and Ms Le Couteur this morning, there is no way that that physically could happen anyway. It is unfortunate that people have not clearly communicated this to Megalo. The time line is just too tight. There would have had to be an extension of their current lease or the finding of suitable accommodation until a workshop could be built at the other end. So let us lay that one to rest.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video