Page 722 - Week 05 - Wednesday, 5 July 1989
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
There are a number of broad issues and a number of very specific issues that this matter of public importance takes up. There is a distinction in terms of public participation in the planning process, which is one that we would all like to have. Public participation occurs in the Assembly when comments are made on possible proposals. One that comes to mind is the Kingston foreshores development, a proposal that we have heard of recently. That is at public participatory level. But there is also a situation where certain instruments need to be issued by the Territory planning authority at an early date to ensure that we as a community have the capacity to know rationally what is proposed and what are the long-term proposals for the general area. Regrettably, starting a couple of Saturdays ago - and I think my friend Mr Kaine drew attention to this in the house - we saw advertisements appearing for draft policy variations. We regard that as a concern.
MR KAINE (Leader of the Opposition) (3.43): One might deduce from looking around the house at the moment that this is a matter of no public concern whatsoever as only one-fifth of the Government is present. That has just changed. It is now two-fifths. If there is a member of the media present I do not recognise one, and hardly anybody from the public is present. I submit, however, that anybody who draws the conclusion that this matter is not important is quite wrong.
This matter has been debated frequently and at length over recent years. It stems from the peculiar fact that we in Canberra seem to be much more concerned as individuals and as a community about the land use and planning of land in our Territory than people elsewhere in Australia. I say that based on personal experience, having lived in many cities and in rural districts over my lifetime, and never have I seen the public interest and public concern that I have seen here in the ACT on this question of land use and planning. One would draw the wrong conclusion if one were to look at the chamber today and assume that it was not a matter of public importance.
I guess that the reason this matter is of such concern to those of us who live in the ACT is the fact that the city has been developed as the national capital and the seat of government, apart from the fact that close to 300,000 of us now live here. It has been developed by the Commonwealth, and by and large the National Capital Development Commission has done a good job. It has produced a city that is pleasing in appearance and at most times pleasant to live in. There is the odd frost that I could do without, but it is a pleasant place to live, and we have taken the view that Canberra is a city, the amenity of which we would like to retain.
I suppose the second aspect of concern is the fact that the land is all publicly owned. Those of us who occupy it do so only by lease, and so we have a collective community
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .