Page 6383 - Week 19 - Tuesday, 17 December 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
APPENDIX 1: (Incorporated in Hansard on 17 December 1991 at page 6187)
CHIEF MINISTER FOR THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY
LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY QUESTION
QUESTION WITHOUT NOTICE
12 DECEMBER 1991
MR JENSEN: CAN THE CHIEF MINISTER ADVISE IF THE PROPOSAL TO CIRCUMVENT THE A.C.T INTERIM PLANNING LEGISLATION VIA THE AMENDMENT TO THE CASINO CONTROL ACT TODAY WHICH REMOVES THE REQUIREMENT FOR PUBLIC CONSULTATION ON ANY CHANGES TO THE TERRITORY PLAN AS IT STANDS AT THE MOMENT, CAN SHE ADVISE AND ASSURE THE ASSEMBLY THAT THIS ATTEMPT TO CIRCUMVENT THE LEGISLATION DOES NOT OFFEND SECTION 26 OF THE ACT PLANNING AND LAND MANAGEMENT ACT 1988 WHICH OF COURSE AS WE KNOW IS A FEDERAL ACT AND CANNOT BE CHANGED BY THE A.C.T.?
MY ANSWER IS:
1. S.26 OF THE ACT (PLANNING AND LAND MANAGEMENT) ACT 1988
PROVIDES THAT:
" THE TERRITORY PLAN HAS NO EFFECT TO THE EXTENT THAT IT IS INCONSISTENT WITH THE NATIONAL CAPITAL PLAN BUT SHALL BE TAKEN TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE NATIONAL CAPITAL PLAN TO THE EXTENT THAT IT IS CAPABLE OF OPERATING CONCURRENTLY WITH THE NATIONAL CAPITAL PLAN”
2. IF THE QUESTION IS ALLUDING TO THE DESIGNATION OF AN AREA FOR A CASINO IN SECTION 65 CITY (GLEBE PARK) BY THE MINISTER UNDER THE CASINO CONTROL ACT, AND THE DRAFT VARIATION TO THE TERRITORY PLAN PUBLISHED BY THE A.C.T. PLANNING AUTHORITY ON 14 DECEMBER 1991 TO PERMIT THE CASINO AND AN INTERIM CASINO ON SECTION 65 CITY, I CAN ASSURE MEMBERS THAT NEITHER ACTION IS INCONSISTENT WITH THE NATIONAL CAPITAL PLAN AND THERE IS NO OFFENCE AGAINST SECTION 26 OF THE COMMONWEALTH ACT.
3. THE CASINO CONTROL ACT HAS BEEN AMENDED TO PROVIDE, AMONGST OTHER THINGS, THAT DESIGNATION BY THE MINISTER OF AN AREA FOR A CASINO OR AN INTERIM CASINO HAS EFFECT NOTWITHSTANDING SECTIONS 8 AND 9 OF THE INTERIM PLANNING ACT AND IN THIS REGARD I REFER MEMBERS TO MY PRESENTATION SPEECH IN WHICH I SAID THAT BEFORE A CASINO COULD BE CONSTRUCTED OR OPERATED IT WOULD BE NECESSARY TO VARY THE TERRITORY PLAN IN THE NORMAL WAY. THERE IS NOTHING IN THE AMENDMENTS TO THE CASINO ACT THAT REMOVES THE REQUIREMENT FOR PUBLIC CONSULTATION ON ANY CHANGES TO THE TERRITORY PLAN AS SUGGESTED BY MR JENSEN.
4. THIS MEANS THAT WHILE THE MINISTER MAY DESIGNATE AN AREA FOR A CASINO AND AN INTERIM CASINO AND IDENTIFY
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .