Page 2570 - Week 09 - Tuesday, 24 August 1993
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Would you like the Western Australian position? We do not know what the Western Australian position is because the Act has not yet been proclaimed. Legislation has been drafted but has not yet been put through the chamber. Presumably you would like the Tasmanian position, which is the only State which provides free access to politicians at the moment. As we have seen, the Victorian position was that it was free, but as soon as the Liberals got in they shut it down. Would you like us to return to the position when you were in government, when 9.8 per cent of requests were being refused, or would you like us to continue with the current situation where 3.3 per cent of requests last year were refused?
Urban Renewal
MS ELLIS: Madam Speaker, my question is directed to the Minister for the Environment, Land and Planning. I am pleased that it is to the Minister and not to the Opposition, as the question would not be heard. In view of a number of media reports on the matter, can the Minister inform the Assembly whether there has been any ad hoc planning and lack of consultation on the urban renewal program?
Mr Kaine: Absolutely not.
MR WOOD: Mr Kaine acknowledges that there is no lack of consultation. Any changes to planning in the ACT, over a very long period, will bring a spirited debate. I note in the paper, on the TV, on the radio, persistently, that claims are being made about ad hoc planning - this is a current favourite - and lack of consultation. It is not the view of this Assembly, because one day last week, as we debated first the Belconnen golf course proposal and then the Tuggeranong Homestead, members on both sides expressed confidence in the very good processes that are undertaken.
By way of an example, let me quote something I heard from the Conservation Council who used those words. It expresses, I think, the difficulty that I have sometimes in working proposals through. Over a year ago - it must be about that timeframe; I do not have it clearly in my memory or in my diary and I did not go back and check - I gave the Conservation Council the urban renewal program in a rather more detailed way than was generally available to the community. I do not think that there was any suggestion of adhockery there, because we gave them a very clear program. It was never said at the time, "Minister, this is not well done". It was not said at the time that there is no consultation.
What the Conservation Council did, through their director, was go around all the sites, or most of them, that were indicated. The director then came back and sat with me and others on the fifth floor and went through each one, saying, "This one is fine, this is fine". For example, with North Watson, he said, "A good idea", and indicated to me a couple of reservations about trees in one area and that maybe there could be some problems with sewerage and drainage and we would have to check with ACTEW, which of course was going to happen anyway. They gave the tick to North Watson, and then a little bit further down the track I seem to be hearing other things.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .