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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2015 Week 10 Hansard (Tuesday, 15 September 2015) . . Page.. 3027 ..

has the opportunity to enhance sustainability outcomes, to increase density and to provide high quality infill. But we need to make sure buildings are energy efficient, attractive from the street and provide passive surveillance. Apartments should be designed to achieve solar access, cross-ventilation and be protected as much as possible from noise. The community has high expectations when it comes to urban renewal, and the challenge for all of us in this place is to deliver that as this city develops.

MR HANSON (Molonglo—Leader of the Opposition) (4.16): I will start by thanking Mr Coe for bringing this matter before the Assembly today. It is a matter that I think is close to all our hearts. Before I go to some of the important points, I will reflect on the comments of those opposite. I was a little encouraged, I have to say, by the tenor of Mr Rattenbury with regard to the lease variation charge. He acknowledged that repealing the lease variation charge in the CBD and the town centres is not a silver bullet, and we certainly acknowledge that. It is not a silver bullet. It is an important step; it is an important measure. I hope that language today reflects that he does understand that that measure is an important step in densification and renewal of our town centres and the CBD. I look forward to that debate tomorrow.

I was a little bit disappointed by Mr Barr’s comments, particularly in relation to two aspects. One is the oft-repeated criticism of the federal government, the Liberal side of government, for cutting jobs. It must again be acknowledged that the jobs that have been cut at the federal level—85 per cent of them—were cut by Kevin Rudd; 85 per cent were cut by Kevin Rudd. He said, “I’m going to take a meat axe to the federal public service and cut 14,200 jobs.” It is not that I applaud either side of politics for this aspect, but if we are going to apportion blame let us at least be honest about it. Mr Barr, probably in his rhetoric about the federal government, might need to get himself a new script.

Attacking developers is pretty short-sighted. This class warfare, this playing to the comrades at the CFMEU, is a line that does not, I think, do the Chief Minister of this territory any justice. Ultimately, the people that Mr Barr identifies and denigrates as, “Oh, your developer mates”, in a pretty unseemly manner—many of whom are people who want to participate in developing, renewing and growing our town centres and Civic—are the people who have helped build this city. They are people who, with their families, have been connected with our community for many decades. They have been involved in growing this city. To denigrate them simply as, “Oh, your developer mates” is best saved, I think, for the Dickson sub branch of the Labor Party and the CFMEU president—if he is available—and others. I think that would be a better time to bring out that sort of cheap, nasty, class warfare rather than attacking the people who have in many ways built this city.

Mr Barr: Like what you have just engaged in? You know a bit about class warfare, Jeremy.

MR HANSON: Mr Barr is injecting about class warfare. This is the problem with Mr Barr. He wants to talk about class warfare as if he is the noble Robin Hood out there looking after the poor. But he is far more the sheriff of Nottingham. There he is stealing from the poor and giving to the rich at every opportunity—whether it is the

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