Page 1300 - Week 05 - Tuesday, 16 April 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Policies". He commented particularly on the leasehold system. I will draw attention to a couple of comments he made about the Interim Territory Planning Authority's key issues paper. The key issues paper states:
Whilst the Territory Plan can identify opportunities for development and set aside land for different purposes, it cannot guarantee that the development will actually take place, or that essential community needs will be met.
David Hall drew our attention to the Territory planners' own attitude to it. But this is what is most critical. He then went on to say:
But that is precisely what the leasehold system should enable it to do - make plans happen.
We have a situation here where the Territory planners and the Minister responsible for planning do not seem to be able to understand the leasehold system; they do not seem to be able to understand that that is exactly what it is about. It is about something much more important and much more critical in terms of social equity than that. I continue quoting from page 47 of David Hall's paper:
Moreover, the leasehold system can be used to secure land use objectives much more effectively than is usual, including some that relate to social objectives e.g. the provision of affordable housing. As such, therefore, the right use of the leasehold system can assist in securing objectives of the Commonwealth Government's Social Justice Strategy. In addition the leasehold system, by variation in the financial terms of lease agreements, can affect the market for different types of development in different locations.
But, more importantly, in terms of social justice, if the leasehold system was administered properly, this Government would not be scraping and crawling to find the money in the way they have by closing down schools and thereby ruining suburbs and communities.
Fast tracking is the concept that Mr Wood raised when he originally raised this matter of public importance. The critical part about that fast tracking as far as I am concerned is that the community has been given three weeks to comment on the whole centre of their community, on the whole centre of their suburb. That is the same amount of time as somebody gets to comment on a variation that is to do with a house next door, yet this is to do with a critical part of the whole suburb. Three weeks is completely inadequate. It is three weeks for the people who are most concerned but who, most likely, have never before lodged an objection or a submission on a draft variation. This reflects a lack of commitment to genuine
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .