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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1996 Week 8 Hansard (27 June) . . Page.. 2325 ..

MS HORODNY (continuing):

change of use charge for a particular development should be used to help fund any work necessary to counter the negative impacts of such a development on the broader community. For example, the change of use charge on a new office block could be used to provide better public transport, traffic management in that area or enhanced open space public facilities. The change of use charge should also be in addition to developer contributions for specific public works required around a particular development; for example, changes to traffic arrangements in the adjacent streets.

On the question of renewal of commercial leases, the Greens agree with Stein that the issues surrounding commercial leases need to be considered separately to residential leases. But we have not developed a final position on the most appropriate means of allowing the renewal of these leases. We note that the Stein report had dissenting opinions on this issue; so we endorse the committee's view that the Government needs to provide a more detailed rationale for why it intends to allow the automatic renewal of commercial leases.

The final issue where the committee could not reach a common position was the issue of appeal rights. On this issue, we must admit that we disagree with the Stein recommendations. Stein sought to limit third party appeals to adjoining lessees and residents associations. We believe this is too narrow, as a particular development can have wider impacts than just on the neighbouring blocks. This approach also puts unacceptable pressure on residents associations to mediate on objections to particular development proposals raised by individuals within their communities. The Greens also favour retaining the Land and Planning Appeals Board. The board was originally set up to ensure that the appeal process was not overly legalistic and that appeals would be decided on planning principles rather than on adherence to the formal development application process. Even though some people may not have been happy with some of its decisions, this is not a good enough reason for abolishing it completely. Referring appeals to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal would be a backward step, in our view.

As the report notes, these and other issues raised by Stein will be dealt with again when the necessary legislative amendments are debated in the Assembly. The Greens will be participating very actively in this debate.

Debate (on motion by Mr Kaine) adjourned.

MR WOOD (4.16): I present Report No. 15 of the Standing Committee on Public Accounts, entitled "Review of Auditor-General's Report Number 1, 1996 - Legislative Assembly Members - Superannuation payments to Members staff - Allowances and severance payments". I move:

That the report be noted.

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