Page 5000 - Week 17 - Tuesday, 11 December 1990
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
firm assurances that that will not be the case. Given that some legislation is necessary to avoid a hiatus in planning, the Opposition will, with those reservations, support this legislation.
MR JENSEN (9.53): The first thing on which I wish to comment is a matter that was raised by Mr Connolly. He indicated that, in fact, this current Government did not acknowledge the work that had gone on prior to the tabling of the first package of legislation as an exposure draft by this Government. In fact, at the time that the Chief Minister tabled those draft planning and heritage Bills in the Assembly on 22 February he acknowledged the work of the Labor Government in preparing the Bills. However, I will refer to some of the tardiness of that work later in my speech.
This is the first time that any parliament has chosen to pass an integrated package of legislation which covers heritage, planning and land management in one group. It has never been attempted before in the Australian parliamentary system. This is the first time that it is being done in Australia. It is an important step forward in the management of those important integrated issues of land, heritage and planning.
Mr Connolly referred to Commonwealth legislation which established not only an Interim Territory Planning Authority but also the process for the development of the plan for the ACT based on a National Capital Plan. It soon became very clear to all involved that this process was much more complex than the drafters of the original Bills had first thought possible, as identified, for example, by the need for the National Capital Planning Authority to provide a certified plan prior to the end of the transition period.
The legislation that was passed by the Federal Parliament provided for a 12-month transition period. As I said, it was quite clear that that 12-month transition period was not enough. In fact, we saw an initial draft National Capital Plan followed by a certified National Capital Plan. Of course, we are still waiting for the final National Capital Plan to be produced, some considerable time after the process was started by the National Capital Planning Authority. I am sure all members are aware that there is a requirement for the Territory Plan to be not inconsistent with the National Capital Plan.
However, unfortunately, the ACT people lost a period of seven months while the previous Follett Government fiddled around the edges and prepared, not legislation, but drafting instructions. They were incomplete drafting instructions, because they were not able to come to agreement about two important issues within their own party room. Mr Connolly does not know that because he was not there. One was on betterment and the other was in relation to an appeals court process for the ACT.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .