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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1996 Week 12 Hansard (21 November) . . Page.. 3946 ..

MR STEFANIAK (continuing):

be something like 1,800. We do not know. That is why we are going through a process now to find out what is best for that suburb. If that scenario is accurate, the percentage would certainly drop. It would drop quite considerably. That has happened in other areas of Canberra. That has happened in other parts of the inner north where the demography has changed. The nature of the housing stock, both public and private, has changed.

With those comments, Mr Speaker, I certainly welcome the inquiry. I think it will be a good concurrent inquiry along with what the community is considering. As Mr Humphries said, the plan was always there for community consultation. It is an extensive process. Mr Moore certainly identified that. Of course, the consultation process outside of the Assembly's deliberations will include further public meetings and precinctual workshops. I understand that it is to conclude in about May of next year. That will go along nicely in conjunction with this Assembly inquiry. There are a large number of issues to look at, but there are certain points in the Greens' amendment which quite clearly are inappropriate and would not help the situation one iota.

MS REILLY (11.35): Mr Speaker, I move the amendment to Ms Tucker's amendment that has been circulated in my name. It reads as follows:

Paragraph (1), omit "the Assembly calls on the Government to", substitute "the Standing Committee on Planning and Environment include in its deliberations the following matters (as decided by the Ainslie community meeting) listed below".

I think Mr Stefaniak hit the nail on the head just now by saying there is a large number of issues to be considered. There certainly is in this whole process. My question is: What is the hurry? Why are we determined to make a decision so quickly? Originally, they were definitely looking for a decision before Christmas.

Mr Humphries suggested that he could not understand why people did not greet this with great joy. I am sure that, if suddenly there were discussions about changing the whole way his suburb of Weston would look, he would not sit there and say yes before he had plenty of time to consider what the impact would be to him personally, to his family, to the value of his house and to his lifestyle. The residents of O'Connor will face this after Christmas. I think the residents of Ainslie should have the opportunity to look at the full implications of what is a very broad and very thorough discussion of what Ainslie will look like in the future. I think it is important that suburbs are looked at to see how they work and whether they are providing the services and the community infrastructure that are required, but people who live in those suburbs have to have time to look at plans. They also have to have an understanding of a good, strong community consultation process.

One of the things that stand out in the discussion of the Ainslie redevelopment, whatever status those plans might have, is that there was no community consultation process in place before these plans were issued.

Mr Humphries: But that came afterwards. That is why they were being put on the table.

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