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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2015 Week 01 Hansard (Thursday, 12 February 2015) . . Page.. 265 ..

In 2009 the review into live community events, which we have all talked about today, spelt out many of the issues and views in the community. A number of actions have been taken and have continued through, as my government colleagues have explained.

I believe a process moving towards a new policy should be guided by many elements, including planning and public amenity, economic development and the arts and, of course, social inclusion. We do not, after all, want to end up with a town like Bomont, with only Kevin Bacon to save us. Given such a wide scope, the government’s amendment to this motion will facilitate the process. I commend the amended motion to the Assembly.

Amendment negatived.

MR COE (Ginninderra) (12.17): As is fairly self-explanatory, the two amendments that I will be moving together recognise the importance of identifying (2)(a), (b), (c) and (d). I have sympathy with Minister Corbell’s view that there may be some technicalities or issues to consider when implementing those, so some wriggle room is required in order to get the best policy outcome. I seek to add a new (2)(e), which would require that the minister report back to this place by the end of this financial year. I seek leave to move my two amendments together.

Leave granted.

MR COE: I move:

(1) In paragraph (2), omit “including but not limited to”, substitute “with consideration of”.

(2) Add new paragraph (2)(e):

“(e) report back to the Assembly by the last sitting day in June 2015.”.

MR CORBELL (Molonglo—Deputy Chief Minister, Attorney-General, Minister for Health, Minister for the Environment and Minister for Capital Metro) (12.18): The government will support these two amendments. Mr Coe’s first amendment is largely the same, or certainly achieves the same intent, as the amendment I circulated earlier. Recognising that we should not pre-empt the outcome of the policy process but instead highlight the issues that should be considered I think is the right way to go. We support that amendment because it is consistent with the objective I was seeking.

Secondly, in relation to the report-back proposal, I am very happy to support that, but on the basis and on the understanding that it is a report back on progress. Certainly the government can report back on progress by that time, but it is unlikely to be a fully informed and completed policy by that time, recognising the need for public consultation, cabinet consideration and so on. On that basis, I certainly have no objection to that amendment.

Amendments agreed to.

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