Page 5365 - Week 17 - Tuesday, 3 December 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
I know that it has been suggested that a draft variation that is approved with defined land in it identifies certain criteria and standards that are required to be enforced, et cetera, and that, in fact, most of those criteria and standards will have to, in themselves, go through a process of consultation prior to agreement, particularly in relation to design and siting approval. But there are some other issues that I think are not necessarily covered by that proposal. I think it is important that people be involved in this final stage of the development. Once again, I think it gets back to the issue of public consultation.
I know that there are some people within the bureaucracy and the two major parties that seem to have some difficulty with public consultation. My experience is that with public consultation it is often better to put it all on the table and talk it out at the time, and you end up with the issue being resolved, because in most cases people generally just want to have their say and have their views heard. In most cases they will accept the logic of the argument that comes out and will move on.
I encountered that a number of times during my period as Executive Deputy to the Chief Minister with some responsibility for planning, and I found that that was an appropriate and very useful way to go. The officials that worked with me, the community groups and other organisations and even the developers involved in those round table discussions, I think, were all slowly starting to realise that it was a process that could be made to work, and work well.
So, on that basis, we are concerned that the defined land issue is really locked up. In the case of Gungahlin and the case of West Belconnen where it is being used, the defined land concept effectively just draws a line around a suburb and says, "This is what is going to happen - nothing else". What I am suggesting is that we may want to look at this issue in future. I was working on some possible further amendments in this area - at the risk of earning the ire of the Government - but because of some changes and the time factor I was not able to bring them forward.
Maybe we need to consider something along the lines of allowing the authority to place a notice in the Gazette and, of course, a newspaper, along the lines that Mr Moore has suggested, on a Saturday, saying that detailed planning for an area previously identified as defined land has been completed and that details can be obtained from the authority and are available for public inspection.
As I have already indicated, copies should also be sent to all those who participated in the public consultation process, and the Legislative Assembly's committee, advising that, unless otherwise directed by the Minister or the Assembly, the changes will take effect, say, for example, 21 days after the notice in the Gazette. That would be the
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .