Page 1520 - Week 06 - Tuesday, 18 May 1993
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Mr Moore: I think I spoke on it.
MR LAMONT: Well, it might have been very briefly.
Mr Wood: Not on this one; on a couple that went through at the same time.
MR LAMONT: It certainly was not a very memorable contribution if he made one. Let us have a look at the processes that apply for section 22 in Braddon. A particular course of action was authorised by the Minister in relation to the public notification and the design and siting arrangements for that block. Mr Moore, that was done pursuant to an Act that you, as a member of this Assembly, helped put through as part of the Residents Rally push - I admit that you were not a member of the Residents Rally at that stage - when the Residents Rally and the Liberals formed the Alliance Government. I have read carefully your contribution during the debates in relation to that legislation. They were significant and quite valuable, Mr Moore. Do you remember what your contribution was in relation to this particular section of the Act?
Mr Moore: No, I do not.
MR LAMONT: There was not one, Mr Moore, from memory. You were responsible for helping to pass into law the procedure that was adopted for this. The law that was used, whether it was used correctly or incorrectly, was a determination of this Assembly. The view of this Assembly and the Planning, Development and Infrastructure Committee is that the variation was an appropriate variation. It met the criteria determined by the law. Ms Szuty, quite rightly at the time, raised some concerns about the indicative plan, as did, I think, Ms Ellis, Mr Kaine, Mr De Domenico and I. That is all it was, an indicative plan. We indicated to the Minister that in authorising the variation we, as a committee, were concerned and that he should keep an eye on it. The Minister has done so. He has done so to the extent that he has refused to allow the design and siting procedures to be completed, Mr Moore, because he, as the Minister, is unhappy with the design and siting proposals.
What does your motion suggest? Your motion suggests that we conduct an inquiry into something which simply does not exist. There is not at this moment an application for design and siting for section 22 in Braddon. That makes it a bit hard to conduct an inquiry into it. If you want a witch-hunt, which I presume is what you are looking for after what you have said today, about whether or not it is appropriate that the particular developers are allowed to make particular propositions to government agencies such as the Housing Trust, I would suggest that you put that as a specific motion and have it debated in this Assembly. That is not what you have attempted to do this afternoon, however. You have attempted to dress up, in a motion such as this, the majority of which is obsolete, your desire for a witch-hunt in respect of section 22 in Braddon.
I have had discussions with the Minister in relation to your motion. I would concur that it be substantially altered to reflect the truth, Mr Moore, in relation to this development and to allow the opportunity for all of the views to be taken into account as to the appropriateness of the stage it is up to now, that is up to the point of approval by the Planning, Development and Infrastructure Committee. I believe that it would be inappropriate for any inquiry to be
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .