Page 4531 - Week 15 - Wednesday, 20 November 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
I am concerned also by the comments made by Mr Collaery in terms of the whole process that has been followed in this proposed redevelopment. Let me say that I have absolute faith and every confidence in the good offices of our planners and of the system that has been followed. I certainly was not impressed by the imputations that Mr Collaery was putting into his speech about there being some supposed black hand operating in this whole process, that there is a small cartel or a large cartel of people who are thwarting the system for their own personal gain. I certainly find that quite preposterous.
I was particularly distressed by what I perceived to be an attack on the current Chief Planner. Whilst I have never worked with the person professionally, I have absolutely no doubt in his ability, and I have every confidence in the ability of the whole Planning Authority to do their job thoroughly.
The arguments that have been put up today, I think, are shallow. I think they are political arguments. I have real reason to believe that this whole point has been taken up because there has been a genuine community concern about the development. I do not dispute that and I sympathise with them. But I think a lot of people have tried to jump onto a band wagon. It is an attempt to somehow embarrass the Liberal Party in what is considered to be their heartland, and I do not support it. We should be looking at the issues and not at the personalities and benefits to be gained from particular subjects. I do not support Mr Jensen's motion and I do not support Mr Collaery's amendment.
MS MAHER (12.02): I have no objections to the draft variation in relation to its change in the land use. Having spoken to some of the residents and having read the summary of comments on the public consultation, I note that many of those residents do not object to the draft variation in respect of the land use. What they are objecting to is the heritage issue and whether the density of townhouses and the scale of development are appropriate to the area.
I think that Mr Wood has given a guarantee that he will investigate further the heritage issue and whether the clubhouse and the original green can be saved and utilised. I feel that that is a very important issue. It should be investigated more. I am no expert either on whether 26 townhouses is too dense; but I think it needs to be looked at, considering the comments from the residents of Forrest and the surrounding area.
I agree, as Mrs Nolan stated, that providing an indoor bowling green enables the community of the ACT to have an increased choice as to what sporting activities they want to be involved in. That is very important also. From my understanding, there has been full consultation on this issue and the views of residents have been taken into
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .