Page 4541 - Week 15 - Tuesday, 14 December 1993
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
MS FOLLETT (Chief Minister and Treasurer) (3.39): Madam Speaker, I must say that, to an extent, I share Mr Kaine's frustration over the matter of Acton Peninsula, in that it is taking an inordinately long time to come to a view on the best use of that peninsula, a view which is supported by the community. In looking at the various consultative arrangements that have been entered into over recent years, Mr Kaine, Mr Wood and Ms Szuty have all pointed to the fact that it is going to be extraordinarily difficult to get agreement on this matter. Not the least of that difficulty is the fact - and it is a fact, Madam Speaker, no matter how much Mr Kaine might like to deny it - that the ACT has to work within a framework of shared responsibility for this planning and development issue. We must accept the fact that this is a designated area and that the Federal Government and its planning organisation have a role as well.
The arrangements that were created at the time of self-government were formulated to provide that the interests of both parties involved in the national capital - both the local citizens and the wider Australian community - were promoted and protected. In response to the need to acknowledge those two client bases for Canberra planning, two planning authorities were set up. We can argue now about whether or not that was the correct thing, or whether or not that is the ideal situation. But that is what happened and that is what we still operate under; and the city that they relate to is the same, which makes for great difficulties. Their responsibilities, and their agendas, of course, are quite different. Anybody who thought that this issue could therefore be resolved quickly and easily has not paid sufficient regard to that dual interest. I consider that Acton Peninsula, on the shores of Lake Burley Griffin, is an area where you could make a good case that there is a national interest surely. If there is any area in the Territory which ought to be the subject of an Australia-wide view, then I believe that the shores of Lake Burley Griffin fall into that category.
Madam Speaker, the impact of these arrangements is that we need to recognise that the people of Australia do have an interest. They have an interest in what happens not just in Canberra but also in areas like Acton Peninsula. At the same time I believe that we have to remain vigilant to promote the rights and the needs of the citizens of Canberra. I do not need to go through the mechanics of that shared responsibility for development of Acton Peninsula. I do, however, want to talk a bit about how it impacts on the ACT Government in practical terms.
Madam Speaker, some time ago the Government made a decision about the location of the hospice which had long been planned for in this Territory. We made this decision in the light of our commitment to the people of Canberra about the provision of health facilities on Acton Peninsula, a commitment which we are still pursuing. We made the decision on the understanding that the range of permitted uses under the National Capital Plan for Acton Peninsula included community facilities, which would include health facilities. Over a quarter of a million dollars was spent in preparing appropriate designs for the hospice on a site that we had previously agreed with NCPA, but when the designs were submitted approval was not forthcoming. We were advised that approval was deferred pending resolution of the Acton Peninsula master plan.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .