Page 1051 - Week 04 - Thursday, 1 April 1993
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
We are informed that both papers have been framed to address the principles of "Integration, Partnership and the Community, Equity, Sustainability and Conviviality". The writers must have blessed their word processors because in writing two papers they were able to use quite a lot of material twice. The definition of "environmental quality", which should have formed a major part of paper No. 7, says of the term that it "includes and seeks to integrate physical, social and cultural conditions and processes which impact on the quality of life".
Madam Speaker, I was disappointed that these two papers, which are so integral to the concept of the 2020 vision, are confusing, and seem to be driven by an already determined agenda which is never discussed. There is an assumption that "a shift to local electorates will affect the emergence of distinct cultural identities and may alter decisions about local environmental quality". Given that there is no plan in the public arena to give the new electorates under the Hare-Clark electoral system control over planning, or the collection of revenue, and given that we have one Territory Planning Authority to oversee development applications and environmental impacts, how will this difference emerge? What underlying assumptions have been made about the workings of future ACT local electorates and how can the community discuss these options?
Madam Speaker, I hope that the reference group has an ambition to arrive at an agreed future for Canberra in the year 2020 through community consultation and a thorough examination of the process to date. The reference group will have at its disposal the services of the authors of these various issues papers and will be able to examine the various demographic statistics which will be such an integral part of the future planning process. I also hope that they will canvass a wide range of opinions on the areas of study for this process. We need to be aware of all the potentialities, not just those that form the current thinking of the bureaucracy.
In doing its work on the 2020 vision the first task of the reference group is to review the issues and fundamental goals outlined in the issues papers. Then, I feel, there will need to be a consolidation phase where problems such as the inconsistencies of the demographics used are resolved. The group then is required to "advise on community views concerning key issues for Canberra in the period to the year 2020". The group also has the task of advising on the goals, strategies and evaluation and review processes which will form part of the final report.
In presenting the community with options, and in the last two reports to this Assembly, I would ask that the language used be devoid of jargon and that concepts be expressed clearly. As a community we have a very high level of education and can understand complex issues, but in the general acceptance that this exercise is meant to produce an outcome for the whole community it should be approached as a study which will be accessible to those whose future it describes - for example, the current secondary college population. We do not assume when talking to students that they all study economics as a subject; therefore, we should aim to express economic outcomes in plain English. If this means that terms such as "vertical fiscal imbalance" need explanation, then this explanation should be included in the documents. I would also ask that any terms which need definition be given practical definitions and not be discussed in terms of what they encompass, include or take into account, as that type of definition makes the term very subjective and we will need objectivity to arrive at common ground.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .