Page 76 - Week 01 - Tuesday, 22 February 1994

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .


Where are the planners and where are the traffic experts that this Government employs? The proposal put forward was merely going to exacerbate the traffic and parking problems that already existed there. How is it that we members of the committee, who are not expert in planning and who are not expert in traffic management, had to put forward a proposal - - -

Mr Wood: That is your opinion. You are pretty good. That is why we all wanted you on the committee.

Mr Connolly: Do not sell yourself short.

MR KAINE: Mr Connolly and Mr Wood are reacting as though I were criticising them. I am not criticising them. I am asking: Where is the expertise that is supposed to exist in the Planning Authority and the traffic management organisation of the ACT Government? Why did they not see the problem and come up with their proposal to fix it? It seems to me to be a bit late to put a proposal such as this to the Planning Committee, seeking its endorsement. It has been through all the processes of the Planning Authority; it has been through the Minister; and it lands on the Planning Committee's desk with this major flaw in it. What is wrong with the process that this can occur? Perhaps the Minister would like to respond to this. The original proposal would have simply caused traffic congestion and traffic problems on Launceston Street beyond what exists there already.

Mr Wood: No, there is no more traffic.

MR KAINE: There will be more traffic, Minister, because there are going to be 22 units there. People are going to try to get out of their driveways onto Launceston Street. Do not tell me that there is going to be no more traffic. There is going to be more traffic. If you suggest a new housing development somewhere, the first thing the Planning Authority will do, ostensibly, is an assessment to determine what additional traffic will be generated and what the consequences will be for all the surrounding streets within two or three kilometres. In this case they did not do it.

I wonder sometimes how these things slip through the net and why these people whose job it is to plan this place could come forward with a proposal that is immediately changed the minute a committee member says, "But hang on a bit. Is it not more logical to do this?". The next minute they come back with a beaut new drawing and say, "Yes, there it is, just what you suggested". But that is not what they put to us in the first place. When we started to question the rationale for the number of residential units proposed in the variation for this site, they went away and they had another look, and they said, "Yes, we can actually increase the number of units on this site and we can change the boundaries slightly and make it a better development". Why put a half-baked proposal to the Planning Committee in the first place? I am merely asking: Where is the expertise that the Planning Authority is supposed to possess? Where is the expertise that the traffic management organisation of the ACT Government is alleged to possess? Why is it not being focused on these problems? That raises big questions in my mind.

I am sure that the Minister and some members of the committee will be delighted that I am no longer going to be a member of this committee, but I - - -

Mr Berry: We want Trevor.


Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .