Page 1447 - Week 05 - Wednesday, 17 April 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
I am sure that it is quite clear to everybody here just exactly what that means, because we are all experts on planning language and planning. I have had a series of phone calls saying, "What the hell does this mean?", and "Are we allowed to comment, or are we not allowed to comment?". I have said, "No, it is an invitation to comment". The response has been, "But what the hell do I comment about?". The reply, of course, is quite simple: "If you think that there ought not be a variation or those schools ought not be bulldozed, then you are entitled to give the reasons as to why they should or should not be bulldozed". That is plain English, but nowhere does it appear.
What about a question and answer system? That would be one possible way of handling it. In the ACT Administration we employ people who are experts on communication. I think that it could well be incumbent upon the Chief Minister, as the Minister responsible for planning, to take this to those people and say to them, "Can you make this easy to read? Can you make it unambiguous?". I say "unambiguous" because the paragraph that I read first about the variations to the plan having an interim effect, and the former NCDC policies, really is, first of all, difficult to understand. It could well be that a person with an untrained eye, somebody who is not used to planning matters but is very interested in the life of their school and the survival of their school, would think that it does not matter what they do, that the draft variation can be rejected by the Legislative Assembly or the draft variation is withdrawn by the authority, whichever case applies.
The implication could easily be read as being that it does not really matter what you do because it is going to go ahead anyway. Whilst there may be some truth in that, I think that we at least have to ensure that people understand that they do have the right to object and the right to lodge the objection and to see that their objection has been considered. In fact, we have seen on a number of occasions that the Territory Planning Authority, when it finally varies the plan, actually sets out the public comments and responds to those public comments in a very positive and, I must say, quite easy way to understand.
That is a very positive approach. People know that their comments have been taken notice of. They may well disagree with the response, but at least they know that they have not simply been ignored. That is something that I think is a most appropriate way of dealing with that. In (c) I have suggested:
remove any wording which might suggest, by its complexity, that objections from members of the public might not be well received.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .