Page 5376 - Week 17 - Tuesday, 3 December 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
These are general principles that are being applied; they are not specific principles. What I am suggesting is that the community, in fact, wants to have some final say in the final design of the suburb. They do not want to dot every I and cross every T. They just want to participate in the final design and assist the Government to ensure that innovative development proposals are put forward. Anyone who has heard me speak in this house in relation to planning and development issues and housing issues knows that I am interested in and keen to see the development of innovative projects such as the Green Street proposals. Mr Wood will get a letter from me today about that particular issue.
I could mention also the model Australian building code for the design of developments in our suburbs, et cetera; the need for passive solar design - all these innovative designs. No-one can suggest that I am not concerned with and interested in innovation. But I think it is important to remember that innovation is a total community consultation process, and I do not think it is inappropriate to allow the community to have some final say in the final direct layout of its suburb.
What this defined land process does is, in fact, stop the community involvement in the final stage of the development of that suburb. It seems to me that that is really the point at issue here in relation to defined land. That is why I think this whole concept needs to be reconsidered and re-examined, because I believe that an appropriate balance can be found between this very broad brush approach that we have here and having a greater role for the community's involvement in the final decisions related to the suburb.
We are talking about six suburbs that are going to provide 8,000 building blocks for the ACT. On current usage rates, that is just under four years' development. A lot of changes can be made over that period of time. I know that Mr Wood is concerned about this particular proposal because he is concerned about there not being sufficient provision of land. But we are talking about 8,000 blocks - almost four years' demand. Some would argue that, if the GST proposals come to fruition, it may be even longer than that, because the public service in the ACT may suffer a bit of a downturn.
We have seen that happen in the past in the ACT. Many of us will recall acres and acres of suburbs and roads that were waiting for years and years. I do not for a minute believe that it is going to be as bad as that, of course. I think Malcolm Fraser put the dead hand on Canberra back in 1975 and I do not think that did this town any good. I do not believe that we will see the same sorts of problems. But there will certainly, I believe, be the possibility of a reduction in demand.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .