Ms MARTIN - 2000-10-17
Anyone can walk into the Department of Lands, Planning and Environment and pick up this brochure entitled Australian Estuaries. It outlines a coordinated national scheme to assess, protect and rehabilitate Australia’s estuaries. In it, it says:
Dams and barrages on rivers alter the hydrology of estuaries and lead to increased sedimentation, closed entrances, altered fresh water flows and changes in tidal flushing.
I assume you have read it.
In the brochure, the minister’s own department is listed in the back as the local contact - numbers and contacts. So I ask the minister, why is the CLP hell bent on damming our beautiful harbour and destroying forever the Elizabeth River inlet, contrary to the wishes of the vast majority …
Members interjecting.
Ms MARTIN: Daryl, you missed out on your Chief Minister. Be quiet!
…contrary to the wishes of the vast majority of Territorians, and scientific evidence? I seek leave to table this, Mr Speaker.
Leave granted.
ANSWER
Mr Speaker, it is a shame that the Leader of the Opposition and the shadow spokesman for lands, planning and environment did not contribute to the debate last week. What I did last week was deliver a major ministerial statement.
Ms MARTIN: A point of order, Mr Speaker! He stands up and says I did not contribute to the debate. He is just talking rubbish.
Mr SPEAKER: I do not think there is a point of order.
Mr BALDWIN: For the benefit of Territorians, I should finish what I was about to say. She did not contribute in a competent manner to the ministerial statement last week. For the benefit of those listening, last week in this House I delivered a major ministerial statement on the future of Darwin and the expansion of Darwin and its environs. In that statement I outlined the work that we have done to date on protecting Darwin Harbour.
First and foremost in this government’s mind is the protection of that pristine asset - the Darwin Harbour and its environs. But at the same time, any responsible government has to allow for the future expansion of Darwin. We all know Darwin is going to grow, and it is going to grow at an extraordinary rate over the next decade or two, thanks to the policies of this government.
The major plank in that statement was that an option for the future expansion of Darwin is the town of Weddell. This has been in the planning process since 1984. There were plans put out in 1984, plans put out in 1990, and what we are doing is saying: ‘Let us now look at the options because a decision has to be made on Darwin’s future within the next three years’. Three years away, and what we are going to do before making that decision, including ensuring that the community and all the major stakeholders are fully aware of the decision that they will have to make in this regard, is that a number of studies have to be done.
They include: Should we dam or put a tidal weir in the Elizabeth River? Will that cause sediment to build up behind such a structure? Will the hydrology of the upper reaches of the catchment of Elizabeth River change? Will there be environmental impact and what extent of impact will that be? Will there be issues with biting midges? We know there will be, but let’s do the studies. We will look at the aquatic marine life and the detriment to that, with having the town of Weddell.
Darwin is expanding. We need to look for future rural residential areas for urban population of the environment. One of the things we said is that we will update all of the information available on other options. We will lay it all on the table. How more transparent can you be? Tell me, how more transparent can you be?
We are laying this on the table for Territorians to become involved in the decision-making of the future of Darwin in three years time when a decision needs to be made including canvassing all other options.
Dams and barrages on rivers alter the hydrology of estuaries and lead to increased sedimentation, closed entrances, altered fresh water flows and changes in tidal flushing.
I assume you have read it.
In the brochure, the minister’s own department is listed in the back as the local contact - numbers and contacts. So I ask the minister, why is the CLP hell bent on damming our beautiful harbour and destroying forever the Elizabeth River inlet, contrary to the wishes of the vast majority …
Members interjecting.
Ms MARTIN: Daryl, you missed out on your Chief Minister. Be quiet!
…contrary to the wishes of the vast majority of Territorians, and scientific evidence? I seek leave to table this, Mr Speaker.
Leave granted.
ANSWER
Mr Speaker, it is a shame that the Leader of the Opposition and the shadow spokesman for lands, planning and environment did not contribute to the debate last week. What I did last week was deliver a major ministerial statement.
Ms MARTIN: A point of order, Mr Speaker! He stands up and says I did not contribute to the debate. He is just talking rubbish.
Mr SPEAKER: I do not think there is a point of order.
Mr BALDWIN: For the benefit of Territorians, I should finish what I was about to say. She did not contribute in a competent manner to the ministerial statement last week. For the benefit of those listening, last week in this House I delivered a major ministerial statement on the future of Darwin and the expansion of Darwin and its environs. In that statement I outlined the work that we have done to date on protecting Darwin Harbour.
First and foremost in this government’s mind is the protection of that pristine asset - the Darwin Harbour and its environs. But at the same time, any responsible government has to allow for the future expansion of Darwin. We all know Darwin is going to grow, and it is going to grow at an extraordinary rate over the next decade or two, thanks to the policies of this government.
The major plank in that statement was that an option for the future expansion of Darwin is the town of Weddell. This has been in the planning process since 1984. There were plans put out in 1984, plans put out in 1990, and what we are doing is saying: ‘Let us now look at the options because a decision has to be made on Darwin’s future within the next three years’. Three years away, and what we are going to do before making that decision, including ensuring that the community and all the major stakeholders are fully aware of the decision that they will have to make in this regard, is that a number of studies have to be done.
They include: Should we dam or put a tidal weir in the Elizabeth River? Will that cause sediment to build up behind such a structure? Will the hydrology of the upper reaches of the catchment of Elizabeth River change? Will there be environmental impact and what extent of impact will that be? Will there be issues with biting midges? We know there will be, but let’s do the studies. We will look at the aquatic marine life and the detriment to that, with having the town of Weddell.
Darwin is expanding. We need to look for future rural residential areas for urban population of the environment. One of the things we said is that we will update all of the information available on other options. We will lay it all on the table. How more transparent can you be? Tell me, how more transparent can you be?
We are laying this on the table for Territorians to become involved in the decision-making of the future of Darwin in three years time when a decision needs to be made including canvassing all other options.
Last updated: 09 Aug 2016