Page 568 - Week 03 - Tuesday, 20 March 1990
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
of response as would be given to a Supreme Court and it would not have the restrictions of that Supreme Court because:
5. A Board or an appointed person shall make a thorough investigation without regard to legal forms and solemnities and shall not be bound by any rules of evidence, but may inform its or his mind on any matter in such a manner as ... he thinks just.
The logical and rational way to speed the process, to ensure that we have an inquiry, to ensure that the developments in the ACT can go ahead and can go ahead in an environmentally appropriate way, in a socially appropriate way, in an economically appropriate way, is to run the inquiry. Do it now and it will probably be nigh on completed before the planning legislation that you are putting forward is through this Assembly. It would be completed before the Interim Territory Planning Authority brings down its plan of Canberra and it could be of great assistance in helping them to be informed on what should be done there. The floodgates are almost ready to be opened.
I turn back to the committee report on the Canberra Times site, the final statement of which says that this should not be regarded as a green light. Well, it is a green light, and that is why I have lodged my own objections to the series of four major developments that are going on along Northbourne Avenue.
Let me make it quite clear that I would be delighted not to have to go to court to object to those. If an inquiry such as this is instituted I would be delighted to withdraw my objections.
Mr Kaine: I bet you would. They will cost you a mint.
MR MOORE: Of course, the risks are certainly there, and I am aware of that. It is interesting that of the 40 applications for the 40 changes of purpose that have been run over the last short while only 10 have been done by this technique of using a section 11A. Of course, that does allow the Chief Minister - and I have written to him on this matter - to delay those applications. I have used the word veto, but there is nothing to stop them applying a second time. I would suggest that the Chief Minister should approach each of those developers and say to them, "Look, withdraw your applications now. We'll run this inquiry and after that you can put your applications in again". At least they would be able to understand what it was or, and this is preferable, they would be able to apply under the new legislation where the appeal system is cheaper and more accessible.
The Chief Minister interjected, "Of course. It'll cost you a fortune". He would know from the Remuneration Tribunal's findings today that I certainly do not have that fortune.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .