Page 1272 - Week 05 - Thursday, 25 June 1992
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
predict the future needs of Canberra based on those forecasts;
describe how the public and private sectors can carry out urban development both jointly and individually.
Then come the two I consider most important in this debate:
show how future needs can be accommodated in alternative plans and analyse the implications of the alternatives; and
describe a preferred strategy for future growth and change, indicating the main metropolitan policies and development programs needed to guide the long term development of Canberra.
What this document did not foresee was the advent of self-government. Its authors worked on the idea that Gungahlin would be developed before the end of the century and there would be a major need for transport infrastructure renewal. These things are now the present, not the future, and we need to bring this ideal of a planned city into the world of self-government, with its increased demands on infrastructure and services.
My second reference is to the consideration of projected demographic, economic, environmental and social changes. There has always been an excellent standard of statistics gathering in the ACT. There does not seem to be an activity carried out by the population that is not quantified. But it is important that these figures be used to look forward, not just back to where we have been. In forecasting demographic trends we need to consider more than just: Where will we house these people and where will they work? There is a need to take this a step further, to provide social and community infrastructure to support the population. Gungahlin is a case in point. As yet, we have not seen any proposals for the development of community services for that population. However, we know that residents are already settling in the area. In so many cases of new development, the residents often suffer for long periods before community services are provided, imposing a heavy burden on people who are, by the very nature of home buying, suffering financial constraints.
My third reference is to Canberra's place as part of Australia's economy. As the national capital we hold a special place in the Australian landscape, but we need to analyse our position within the economic framework. We have a growing and diverse private sector and a well-known public sector. We need to establish how Canberra's planning can augment and assist the development of a sustainable industry base.
Fourthly, I think the Planning, Development and Infrastructure Committee should examine a future vision with regard to the quality of life, economic development, employment location, environmental and energy management, finance, education, health, community services, transport, housing and social justice issues in the context of what Canberra will be like in the year 2020. While I have touched on these matters so far, they need to be examined and re-examined constantly and cross-referenced to other aspects of this review. These topics address the sustainability of growth and development in Canberra and, like the legacy of previous plans, would give future legislators information about the vision of the current generation.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .