Page 5700 - Week 17 - Thursday, 5 December 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
clarification rights and reply and where possible, resolving differences, settling objections, which shall be recorded by the Authority and occur within a prescribed period.
This requires the Minister to consider, during his deliberations, information on joint discussions and meetings between the parties, including those who have commented during the public consultation period, and relevant authorities, et cetera. These meetings are designed to seek to resolve issues of concern between groups. I think that is the way that we should be moving, to a form of mediation, when we are dealing with planning disputes. We are just formalising it and ensuring that the Minister, during his considerations that are required under this clause, will take into account those discussions.
Once again, the Minister does not have to accept the reports; he can come to a different view. However, we believe that these discussions are most important. We consider that they will become a much more popular way of resolving disputes in relation to these sorts of issues and planning issues in the ACT.
I was involved in a number of these sorts of discussions while I was in government and they very quickly ensured that issues were resolved. In most cases everyone went away much happier and with a clearer understanding of the issues. That is why it is important to have this subclause included in clause 229 - to ensure that the Minister does take these matters into account. I am not saying that Mr Wood would do so, but in the future there may be some who would wish to ignore this very important mediation and conference-type situation.
MR KAINE (Leader of the Opposition) (4.52): Mr Speaker, I shudder at the thought that one day I might be the Minister having to comply with this kind of thing in the Act which prescribes, as a matter of statute, that I must do these things. Mr Jensen would almost have done better if he had given a list of the things that the Minister should not take into account rather than list all the things that he should take into account under these circumstances. It is simply too prescriptive as to the kinds of things that a Minister must do. I personally find it quite offensive - being told by the Act, in great detail, as this does, the sorts of things that I must do.
Mr Jensen: Why don't you take out clause 229, then, and be consistent?
MR KAINE: I do not mind the Minister having discussions; but, when you get down to telling him what he must consider, in the most minute detail in an Act like this, as I have said many times in connection with these amendments, it is over the top.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .