Page 2928 - Week 10 - Wednesday, 14 September 1994
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
The current fracas concerning questions of dual occupancy and so forth should not in any way be seen as diminishing the effectiveness of the public consultation that occurred as part of the development of the Territory Plan. In any community things as complicated as laws associated with planning, laws associated with life, health and safety and laws associated with public order and public health - all of those matters - are issues that are complex and evolving. Therefore, if you embark upon a strategy of involving the public in the processes to arrive at outcomes on those issues, it must, of itself, be an evolving strategy. It is not something which, of itself, can be singular. What happens is that you restrict the capacity to develop policy to reflect community attitudes and community expectations. That is the strength of the draft protocol which the Chief Minister has launched. I believe that it is a protocol that enunciates principles that will stand this community in good stead over the coming decades.
The consultation on the Gungahlin Town Centre development, Madam Speaker, commenced with a critique of existing centres and the development of a shared vision for the Gungahlin Town Centre by the different interest groups involved. This vision and all the issues raised during consultation were faithfully reported in the discussion papers that were prepared. A community brief was prepared following a series of interactive community workshops to guide the development of the principles of the centre. The brief again reflected the differing perspectives that have to be balanced in that planning framework. The community participated in the development of all of the concepts and were kept well informed. Hardened critics of Canberra planning publicly acknowledge how valuable that process and the previous Territory planning process have been. Madam Speaker, during this process the Government has delivered effective participative opportunities, which were timely, adequately resourced and open. Access for all groups and individuals was optimised.
A further example, Madam Speaker, of the Government's commitment to consultation with the community is demonstrated in the Government's unique approach to the budget process. In the preparation of the 1989-90 budget, the Government published an initial budget statement - the first time any government in Australia had made such a move. The purpose of producing an initial statement was to give the community an opportunity to consider the document as a whole and to provide input to the Government on how it believed the draft budget should be changed. To formalise this process and to provide a channel for community input, the Government established a budget consultative committee. The committee was a peak body with representatives from the business sector, unions and the wider community. The level of response and the quality of submissions provided to the committee demonstrated that the community took advantage of that chance, that opportunity, to participate in the budget process. There was recognition within the committee that, while the concept of that community consultation on the budget should be maintained, the method used could be changed.
In subsequent budgets, community involvement has continued to be encouraged. Peak community and industry groups have been invited to make submissions outlining their views on a budget strategy. Meetings have been held with key groups. Input has been sought from the advisory councils established by the Government to
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .