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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1996 Week 6 Hansard (22 May) . . Page.. 1589 ..

MS McRAE (continuing):

and probably my party believes and most of us still believe - that there is an equity question about people who can only walk to their local shop, people who do not have access to cars, people who have problems in even getting on buses and young people who cannot afford to use the buses. There is a very basic equity question there, but I cannot stand up and say that we have to stop town centre developments because there is an equity question. There is a very serious equity question, but I do not see that standing up here and preventing town centres from expanding, at the express wish of a great deal of people in the ACT, is going to solve that equity question.

I want to pursue the equity question in other forums, in other places, and to come to grips with how we, as a collective, can assist those very people who most need our assistance. But I do not see that standing up here and saying that town centres ought not expand is helpful today, as it was not in the least helpful when the Liberal Party took that stance against the Tuggeranong Hyperdome. All the arguments used against it, despite the fact that they were calling for further evidence, were based on a lot of romanticism at the time and were grasping at the same arguments as are being grasped at today.

This party will not support either Mr Moore's amendment or the motion. The party and I support very strongly some better understanding of how to meet the needs of people who cannot afford buses, who cannot drive or who find difficulty in using the types of centres that we have planned. I think it is actually a bigger issue than just retail. Our roads are often too big; our suburbs are badly designed; the planners have not taken into account the type of society that we have become. I do not think governments have the answers yet. I am not suggesting that we will have them even tomorrow. But what we have to face is that this is the issue that faces us all; that we need to agree that we want to develop communities where people can live, work and be comfortable. That is an issue, no doubt; but putting a moratorium on town centres is not going to solve that problem. We will not be supporting this motion.

MR DE DOMENICO (Minister for Urban Services) (11.32): Mr Speaker, as my colleague Mr Humphries has foreshadowed, the Government's retail policy is to be released in the very near future. To have this debate now, prior to that release, is, to my mind, not only inappropriate but also, to be a bit bolder, perhaps a waste of this Assembly's time. However, I will keep my comments brief, based on the statements I have just made.

Mr Speaker, Mr Humphries has dealt with the planning aspects of this motion that seeks to place a moratorium on town centre development other than in Gungahlin. I will deal with some of the other aspects of the debate. The Government has recognised that many local retail centres have been experiencing, or are likely to experience, trading difficulties because of a range of social, economic and retail industry factors, and that a long-term strategic plan for the future development of retail industry in the ACT is needed. I noted with interest that Ms Horodny said on radio this morning that a long-term strategy was needed. That is exactly what this Government is about to release very shortly, Ms Horodny - a long-term strategy. I think you knew that as well. As Mr Humphries suggested, you chose to move this motion today for your own reasons.

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