Page 3089 - Week 10 - Thursday, 15 August 2013

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

Mr Smyth: I ask for your guidance on some of the language that Mr Corbell just used.

MADAM DEPUTY SPEAKER: Mr Corbell, I am not asking you to withdraw. I do not think it is necessarily unparliamentary language but just watch the terminology as we go forward.

MR CORBELL: Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. Clearly, it is this extraordinary political fantasy that Mr Hanson is developing. I know he realises that he has got another four years, another long four years on the opposition benches. How many is that for you, Mr Smyth? How many more is that for you, Mr Smyth? Are we over a decade yet? I think we are over a decade on the opposition benches, Mr Smyth.

Mr Coe makes a series of assertions and allegations which are simply wrong. He says that the engineering study has not been done. It has been done. Not only has it been done; it has been publicly released. It is called a study by URS Australia. It is on the public record. It analyses, line by line by line, the costs of the different elements of building this project. What a joke from the shadow minister that he is not even aware that on the public record there is a detailed engineering analysis of this project that estimates costs on a line by line by line basis.

It shows that those opposite are not really interested in a genuine debate about the best infrastructure decisions to meet the challenges of a growing city, to achieve a more sustainable city, to achieve a more efficient city, a more productive city, a more equitable city. All they are interested in is the politics, the short-term politics. That is all they are interested in, and we hear it made manifest in their absurd conspiracy fantasy that would give a range of authors a good run for their money in terms of exactly how feasible or believable it is about what this is for the government.

I know what this project is about for the government. It is about setting our city up for the future. I know what my colleagues think about this project. It is about making the big decisions that set our city up for better productivity, better sustainability, higher levels of development activity, more housing choice, all of the things that we should be realising as our city enters its second century.

I know where my colleagues stand on this. They stand right beside this project. This is about the delivery of this project. They back this project. It is not an easy undertaking for a political party to go out before an election and say that this project is our priority, a big multi-million dollar project with all sorts of challenges politically and otherwise. But it is down to the leadership of my colleagues, first and foremost my Chief Minister, who has said that this is the priority for the government. She has worked closely and in a very effective way to build a robust governance and oversight framework for the delivery of what is a critical project for the government.

You can take two roads on projects like this. You can take the high road or you can take the low road. You can have a look at whether or not the project has the capacity to change the way our city develops, change the pattern of development in our city, to give people real transport choices, to drive enhanced levels of investment, to create more sustainable outcomes in the built environment. You can take that perspective or

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