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

None . . Page.. 586 ..

We are nibbling away, a bit at a time; and nobody seems to be looking at the overall situation, even to sound a warning that says, “If you approve this one, you are getting dangerously close to the lower limit of what is acceptable”. These are issues, I suggest, that are not deficiencies in the Territory Plan or the accompanying legislation. They say something about the way that those documents are administered. It might be that, when developers come to the Planning Authority, to the Planning and Environment Committee and to the Government with a proposal, they should be looking at all of these issues and making sure that they are all dealt with.

In the case of the traffic issue, the developer did a traffic evaluation. He looked only at the immediate vicinity of the development that he was proposing. He was not concerned about people who lived in Dunlop or Gungahlin. He was concerned about only the local area; as well he might be, because that is his only interest. We have a much broader interest than that. Apart from the Government having another look at this question of the development of concessional leases, the Government must have another look at traffic arrangements in the broader sense, and this strategic overview within which a specific proposal for variation is being processed; so that when the proposal comes to us - and I mean “us” collectively - all of those issues should be covered in the briefing papers. We should not be left to ask the questions about what is the true situation with this, that or the other thing.

The betterment tax was a classic case where there seemed to be a belief on the part of the officials that 50 per cent betterment was okay. It was not until we raised the question with them that they satisfied themselves even as to the effective date upon which this current lease started. Was it 1987 or was it 1954? They went away; they checked; they came back; and they affirmed that it was 1954. Those two dates are very critical in terms of how much betterment tax is paid under the existing law. Yet there seemed to be uncertainty amongst the officials as to what the conditions were. There needs to be a bit of homework done. Perhaps this report will sharpen up the way that the law and the plan are administered.

Debate (on motion by Mr Humphries) adjourned.

LAND (PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT) ACT - VARIATION NO. 23TO THE TERRITORY PLAN

Papers and Ministerial Statement

MR HUMPHRIES (Attorney-General and Minister for the Environment, Land and Planning): Mr Speaker, for the information of members, I present, pursuant to section 29 of the Land (Planning and Environment) Act 1991, approval of variation No. 23 to the Territory Plan relating to Yowani golf course, which is Lyneham, section 67, block 1, in part. In accordance with the provisions of the Act, the variation is presented with the background papers, a copy of the summaries and reports and a copy of any direction or report required. I ask for leave of the Assembly to make a statement.

Leave granted.

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