Page 5722 - Week 17 - Thursday, 5 December 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Mr Speaker, when I spoke to this in the initial consideration of the Bill, Mr Wood gave us a couple of replies. One of the replies was that it is not necessary to reconsider this because the National Capital Plan already covers it and I had not included that in my amendment. On reconsideration, I was correct. At the time I offered to include it in my amendment. The National Capital Plan is already included in the legislation. You will see it there under subclause 7(1). There is no doubt that things have to be done within the confines of the National Capital Plan.
Apart from that, the Metropolitan Policy Plan is still the only long-term strategy plan in existence for the ACT. I read from page 73 of the "Draft Territory Plan Planning Report". It states quite categorically that it is not and it does not have a long-term strategy. There is no long-term strategy for the ACT as far as planning goes. It states:
... pending proposed joint studies with the NCPA, the Territory Plan cannot at this stage incorporate a comprehensive strategy for the ACT's longer-term development.
Recognising that there is no longer-term development strategy plan for the ACT other than the now getting outdated Metropolitan Policy Plan, it is important that we put the pressure on planners to provide an appropriate strategy plan. The 1984 Metropolitan Policy Plan was designed to go through to the year 2000 and beyond.
The other argument that Mr Wood raised at the time was that all the measures in the Metropolitan Policy Plan are in the draft Territory Plan. That simply is not true. If it were true, he would not be worried about this amendment; he would be quite happy to accept this amendment. The reality is that the long-term strategy sets out quite clearly what will happen if we allow our planning to take a short-term view and what the problems will be if a short-term view is taken.
I think almost everybody in this chamber, apart from those who were elected on an anti-self-government basis, came here with a policy of having some type of vision for Canberra. In fact, some even called their policies a vision for Canberra. It seems to me that, if we are going to have a vision of Canberra, our planners, of all people, must have a long-term vision for Canberra. We must insist that they do. That is a responsibility that this Assembly must take very seriously. So, until they review and come up with a new long-term strategy, let them at least be tied by a long-term strategy for Canberra that goes beyond the year 2000, and that is the 1984 Metropolitan Policy Plan.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .