Page 997 - Week 06 - Wednesday, 26 July 1989
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
MR MOORE (4.33): The motion put forward by Mr Jensen, to ensure that we have appropriate planning legislation, is really about the very nature of Canberra. I am horrified when I hear time and time again people draw comparisons between Canberra and places like Melbourne, Sydney, Adelaide and Perth, all of which have their own particular beauties and their own particular strengths. There is a tall poppy syndrome. The most beautiful and the best place to live is Canberra, and we are on about keeping it that way. Let us not be ashamed about it. Let us be proud. We are fortunate enough to live in this environment that has been created through very careful planning and a great vision.
There is a need for appropriate legislation to ensure this vision goes ahead. In fact, it is not just one vision but a series of visions, and the first of those visions was that of Burley Griffin. As Canberra grew, we outgrew it.
Then, we were very fortunate that a group of far-sighted town planners in the 1960s came upon the notion of extending that vision, and came up with a method of doing it. That method is what we generally refer to as the Y plan. While the rest of Australia was busy trying to work out ways and means of decentralising, when major cities were looking for areas in which to decentralise, when Albury-Wodonga was being developed, when South Australia attempted its Monarto development, Canberra was able to do that very thing.
It was able to establish through its Y plan a series of decentralised town plans. Had we stuck with that vision, we would not be having to deal with the extra expense of infrastructure problems with which we now have to deal. Only today we were told that a great part of the borrowing for capital expenditure that we have to include in our budget has to do with public transport. Had we had a situation in which the work was centred where people in Canberra were living, as that vision had provided, we would not have needed to spend the extra money on transport.
Some would argue that there is a new vision for Canberra, and that vision is about a central business district. I say, "Rubbish". There is no new vision for Canberra. The last time there was a new vision for Canberra was with the decentralised system, the Y plan. Since then there simply has not been a new vision, and that is where planning in Canberra has gone off the rails. Not only has there not been any new vision, but also there has not been any mechanism to appeal when our planners or our bureaucrats have moved away from that vision, other than to go to the Supreme Court. It is a great joy to me to realise that the Supreme Court has finally accepted that a vision for Canberra needs to be followed.
I have been told - and it is third hand - that Mr Whalan, our Deputy Chief Minister, has referred to the decision by Justice Kelly on the Concrete Constructions application in
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .