Page 4716 - Week 15 - Wednesday, 7 December 1994
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
PLANNING, DEVELOPMENT AND INFRASTRUCTURE -
STANDING COMMITTEE
Report on Inquiry into Possible Changes to Planning Legislation
MR BERRY (Manager of Government Business) (4.19): I present report No. 35 of the Standing Committee on Planning, Development and Infrastructure entitled "Inquiry into Possible Changes to Planning Legislation in the ACT", together with extracts from the minutes of proceedings. I move:
That the report be noted.
Madam Speaker, it is with pleasure that I table the thirty-fifth report of the Standing Committee on Planning, Development and Infrastructure. The report is entitled "Inquiry into Possible Changes to Planning Legislation in the ACT" and it incorporates the committee's conclusions about the changes that should be made to planning legislation. The report contains 31 recommendations covering the full range of planning issues, including consultation, inquiries, lease issues, approvals, reviews and appeals, the environment, heritage, defined land, draft variations, encroachments, betterment, the Unit Titles Act and joint venture agreements.
The decision to have an inquiry into the legislation was made some time ago and, as a result of a turn of events which were beyond my control, I became chairman of the committee and subsequently got amongst this issue, which is an important issue affecting the ACT. I think it is important to say that there was some hysteria about planning issues out in the community. I think some of it emerged quite naturally and some was whipped up a little bit. It all needed to be addressed in a methodical way. I think the Government has done that by virtue of the inquiry processes that it has undertaken, and, as well, this committee's efforts, I am sure, will make a major contribution to future planning of the Australian Capital Territory.
I will refer to some of the committee's recommendations. One is that we double the minimum time for public consultation on a draft variation to the Territory Plan from the present 21 days to 42 days. On the face of it, that sounds as though it is a lot; but there was considerable concern about that issue. I think the committee's recommendation on that issue is a good one. I think all of them are. Another is that we amend the legislation to enable draft variations to the Territory Plan to be put forward directly by proponents and not just by the ACT Planning Authority, as is the case at present. There were quite a few suggestions that the ACT Planning Authority gave the appearance that it was acting for the proponents. That gave rise to the unfair allegation, in the committee's view, that they were in cahoots, but there was no evidence to suggest that.
The committee also recommended that we restrict the use of the defined land concept to greenfields development and not to urban infill development. That separates those two issues, to ensure that it is much clearer for the community. I think the committee formed the view that there needed to be clarity of issues in the area of planning. Although it is a complex one, and it is hard to imagine circumstances where everybody would fully understand everything about the planning legislation in the ACT, I think the committee felt obliged to ensure that its recommendations assisted in clarifying the issues and took away one of the triggers for hysteria - a lack of information or a lack of clear information.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .