Page 847 - Week 03 - Wednesday, 27 February 2013

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

I also make note of Mr Rattenbury’s comments in relation to wood fired heaters. The reason that I had a smirk on my face when he made mention of it is that it sparked memories of a conversation I had with a constituent whilst doorknocking down in Lanyon—another example of the disconnect that this government is experiencing when they talk about policy implementation.

Ms Burch interjecting—

MR WALL: I have spoken to numerous people in the community. This one constituent that I was speaking to runs a small business locally. Its primary business model is installing wood heaters in ACT homes. Wood fired heaters provide an exceptional form of renewable energy to heat homes. They provide choice to Canberra residents. I understand that there are some concerns by some parts of the community with the wood smoke. I feel that efforts could be best concentrated on educating home owners and people that are choosing to use wood heaters about the best ways to use them, and also offer some incentive for them to upgrade. Simply laying a blanket ban or a moratorium on the installation of wood fired heaters is only restricting choice by the residents of Tuggeranong.

MR HANSON (Molonglo—Leader of the Opposition) (3.38): I commend Mr Seselja for bringing this motion forward. It reflects his longstanding and ongoing commitment to the people of Tuggeranong, in particular the people of the Lanyon valley.

Ms Gallagher interjecting—

MR HANSON: The Chief Minister sits there making snide comments across the floor. I wonder when she last visited down in the south of Canberra—when she went down to the Lanyon valley herself. It is reflective of the performance of her government and the neglect that we have seen from this government of the people of Lanyon. It is pretty clear that she has not been there enough. We know that the Chief Minister spends a lot of time around in the north, but we do not see her or her ministers, or the efforts of this government, focused on the people down south. That is pretty clear.

I would like to turn my attention to the amendment that has been put forward by Ms Burch and a couple of aspects of it that are just grubby and politically motivated, to be honest. Rather than focusing on the substance of the motion, which is about delivering services for the people of this town, particularly Lanyon, what we have seen from those opposite is political game playing—what basically is political opportunism and an attempt to distract from the main purpose, which is better service delivery down in Lanyon, better facilities for the people of Lanyon. What we are seeing is a grubby attack.

When I look at this, it says that Mr Seselja betrayed the trust placed in him by the voters of Lanyon valley. Why is that the case for Mr Seselja—who will be, if successful at the elections, stepping up as a senator with responsibilities across Canberra? We know, given his performance in this place and his interest in the people of Lanyon, that that will continue. If he is successful as a senator, that commitment, I am sure, will continue in this place. There is no betrayal. The betrayal—

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