Page 3611 - Week 14 - Tuesday, 8 December 1992
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
committee work. I was very impressed by the efforts put in by the Planning Authority officials in fully briefing members of the committee. We also visited the West Belconnen site, and I spent much of my own time considering the documentation put before me. There was no haste at all on my part in considering that variation and deciding in the manner in which I did.
I would like to put on the public record that I am very unhappy with the comments made against the committee, and therefore me as a member of that committee, in Ms Szuty's dissenting report. It is with quite a bit of sadness that I say that, because members of the PDIC - one of the larger committees of this Assembly, with five members, and with one of the largest workloads - have worked together extremely well. Up until now we have not had a problem like this, and I hope that we do not have one like it in the future.
MS SZUTY (5.01): It is with regret that, with regard to West Belconnen, I have had to table a dissenting report to report No. 8 of 1992 of the Standing Committee on Planning, Development and Infrastructure. The terms of reference of this standing committee require the committee "to examine matters related to planning, land management, transport, economic development, commercial development, industrial and residential development, infrastructure and capital works, science and technology". The proposed West Belconnen development incorporates the majority of the above in its development, which is expected to meet the needs of some 9,000 residents of the ACT.
Sections 25 and 26 of the Land (Planning and Environment) Act 1991 require the Executive to refer draft variations to the Territory Plan to an appropriate committee of the Assembly for report and the Executive to then have regard to the committee's recommendations before approving any variation. Madam Speaker, West Belconnen is no ordinary variation to the Territory Plan. Since its inception, the proposed development of West Belconnen has attracted much controversy and, indeed, during the election campaign areas A1, A2 and D were removed from the proposal. The original environmental impact statement was considered to be so inadequate as to require another environmental impact statement to be undertaken.
The final environmental impact statement, dated August 1992 and tabled by the Minister for the Environment, Land and Planning on 24 November 1992 along with significant background papers, has been available for members of the Planning Committee and the general community to peruse for less than two weeks. In the report on public consultation concerning the draft variation it is noted that 241 responses were received, 46 expressing support for the variation and 189 indicating that they were critical of or opposed to the variation. I believe, Madam Speaker, that the Planning Committee has not had time to consider their concerns and to establish beyond reasonable doubt that the variation should proceed.
The Standing Committee on Planning, Development and Infrastructure has had every opportunity to defer consideration of this variation until members become familiar with the material provided by the ACT Planning Authority and to further consider the involvement of the wider community through an inquiry process. As I have stated before, this is no ordinary draft variation.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .