Page 2303 - Week 08 - Tuesday, 17 August 1993
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
prepared to place on the public record, in unequivocal terms, that it is his responsibility to ensure, firstly, that such covenants are developed and, secondly, that they are implemented and enforced. The committee was extremely grateful for the proponent's quite clear and unequivocal statements in that regard.
Madam Speaker, I believe that the decision that the committee has made is the right and proper decision - indeed, the only decision that could have been made, given the facts and circumstances in relation to this variation. I have much pleasure in tabling the report on the variation this evening.
MR KAINE (8.14): Madam Speaker, it is well known to the members of this house that there are a number of major housing development projects, either ongoing or planned, at the moment, and that there is a great deal of public concern in respect of some of them. They include West Belconnen, North Watson, North Duffy-Holder, the old Tuggeranong Homestead, and the Belconnen golf course. Concern has been expressed - and it culminated in a meeting only on Sunday - about the process and, let us be clear, about the way the Government is dealing with such developments. Whether that concern is justified or not remains to be seen. The result of the public protests has not yet been seen, but I think the Government should listen very carefully to what the community is saying and satisfy itself that it is dealing appropriately with these matters. This particular project, along with the others, was the subject of some publicly expressed community concern about what was proposed and what was being done in the Belconnen golf course.
Madam Speaker, I hope that the community groups in other locations that have concerns about the process can be reassured by the outcome of this particular project culminating, up to this point, in this committee's report. The committee was well aware that community groups and individuals - not only those living adjacent to the Belconnen golf course and some members of the golf club but also some community groups with broader views - had some concerns about what was being proposed and they were concerned that their interests and the interests of the community at large be preserved.
I think that the processes that the committee has gone through should reassure people that, no matter what happens elsewhere in the process, at the point at which a variation comes to the Planning Committee those people will be given another chance to express their view, to be heard in public hearing and to have their views tested by the committee. I think that we satisfactorily demonstrated that in this case. Mr Lamont has mentioned the 17 witnesses that came before the committee. About half of those people came to the committee expressing their concerns either that their own interests as members of the golf club were being impinged upon or that the community interest was being impinged upon.
We listened to their evidence and we required the public officials of the Planning Authority and the Land Division to justify their position - to affirm that they understood the nature of what the members of the community were saying and that they had taken those views into account properly and weighed them up in arriving at the final decision as to what should occur there. For example, concern was expressed that the development site was too close to the Belconnen tip; that toxic material would have its impact on people residing in this estate once it was finished. We put that to the authorities, the government officials, and they were able to demonstrate quite clearly that the location is well outside the parameters established by national standards - not local standards, national standards.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .