Page 2305 - Week 08 - Tuesday, 17 August 1993
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
I think that this exercise and the other ones that are coming down the track are perhaps focusing the attention of this Assembly, of the Government, of the Planning Authority and of the other public officials who are involved in the process.
We are all, I think, becoming more aware of the fact that the community does have expectations. They do not expect to be told by government what is going to happen. They expect to be consulted; they expect to have their views taken into account. Perhaps that has not been so apparent in the past. In recent months there have been other developments similar to the Belconnen golf course. There is the one on the roundabout at Narrabundah, where a sod has not been turned yet. Projects have gone through the process and come out the other end, and something is now happening in connection with them. Indeed, some modifications were made to the proposal in lower Narrabundah as a result of our considerations. I think we are beginning to show that there is an increasing awareness of the public's desire to be involved, and we are making sure that they have an opportunity to be heard; so perhaps this will lessen their concern and increase their awareness that some people are in fact listening to what they have to say.
Having said that, Madam Speaker, I support this recommendation. Members will note that there was not even a dissenting report on this. The report was endorsed by all the members of the committee. I am sure that the other members will want to speak for themselves, but I am quite satisfied that the process has been effective in this case. I commend this report and its recommendation to the Assembly.
MS SZUTY (8.24): I would like to add my comments on this draft variation to those which have already been made by Mr Lamont and Mr Kaine. I also would like to say that the Belconnen golf course draft variation was examined at length by members of the Planning Committee. I would like to outline a few of the steps in that process which were fairly important from my point of view. The variation was first considered at the Planning Committee meeting on 11 June, which Mr Lamont referred to, when the committee resolved to hold a public hearing into the variation. We decided that at the very first meeting that we had on the matter.
We held the public hearing, in part because of the fact that 17 respondents had taken the opportunity to write to the ACT Planning Authority about the variation. The responses received by the Planning Authority raised a number of issues, including the consultation process, the impact on the surrounding environment, planning and design processes, defined land, traffic, environmental concerns, the payment of betterment and the question of equity. A number of people in fact took the opportunity to appear at the public hearing. I will not go into details about that because Mr Lamont has already outlined who those people were.
A point that Mr Lamont did not make was that, prior to the holding of the public hearing, the committee took the opportunity to inspect the site. That was on the Wednesday before the public hearing was held. In fact, we spent a good couple of hours going over the site in a couple of vehicles to satisfy ourselves that the proposed development was something that we could in fact support.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .