Page 4342 - Week 13 - Thursday, 4 December 2014
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
What we need to do is to deal with today’s Mr Fluffy issue that we inherited. That is what this process does and it does it to the best possible level of fairness that delivers for the individuals who are affected right now and for the whole community that we as a government need to look after as well. We also need to continue to look after all the other aspects of this city.
The Chief Minister has just made similar comments to those that I had jotted down in preparing for this contribution to the debate. We need to keep building this city into the future. We have got to build roads. We have got to repair footpaths. We have got to build new schools and we have got to do a whole lot of other infrastructure—the things that Canberra Liberals write to me about every single day, saying, “We need more money for this, or this, or this.” I get many letters each week from them and other constituents. All these other things have to be afforded as well. The government has to try to find the right balance.
That is what we have sought to do here. We have sought to find fairness for the whole community. These principles that Mr Hanson is inserting into the legislation I think capture that. They capture the fact that, as far as possible and reasonable, we need flexibility, we need fairness and we need safety. They are all hard asks in the absence of significant support from the commonwealth government, because, let us be honest, the commonwealth have done the very bare minimum, the absolute bare minimum, they can in this process.
So the ACT has to bite the bullet on this. I think the government has done that, and that is why I have supported the bill today and why I feel that the point Mr Hanson is making is not a fair one. I think he has got it wrong. I think that we have sought to find the best possible balance we can for the whole community on this package.
MS GALLAGHER (Molonglo—Chief Minister, Minister for Health, Minister for Higher Education and Minister for Regional Development) (12.00): I move:
In proposed clause 3A(b), after “provide”, insert “, so far as is possible and reasonable,”.
Mr Hanson accused me of weasel words. I am actually picking up the words that he has inserted into paragraph (c) of his amendment. It will read exactly the same as his amendment: provide, so as far as is possible and reasonable, flexibility.
Instead of having that justified at subsection (c), it will apply to subsection (b). It is in line with the scheme that is in place and, as I said, with flexibility. More flexibility exists in the scheme than I think is commonly understood. That is why we need those who are not happy with how the scheme is to engage actively with the task force. That is the job that starts as soon as people would like.
For those people who are unhappy with the scheme: get a valuation done. Talk to the task force. No-one is going to move you out of your home without your permission. Nobody has a gun to your head; just engage with the task force. I think probably in my last opportunity to say any words on this bill today, I do note that I find it a little
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video