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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1996 Week 14 Hansard (10 December) . . Page.. 4645 ..

MR MOORE (continuing):

It goes on in that tone, Mr Speaker, in a special kind of tone, to really get the message across that you can do it. That is the tone in which that document was written and, as such, it was a document that provided a huge number of terrific ideas that were kept in that context.

The Government at the time then interpreted that into a series of principles and described how it could be developed into a strategic plan. It sets out very neatly on page 8 how it could be done. Remember that Mrs Carnell stood up and said, "Look, it has no implementation policy", and that sort of thing. It is very neatly set out that that is not what this is intended to be; that that is the next step, and that is what the strategic plan should be. It sets it all out very neatly.

Mr Speaker, Mrs Carnell also raised the issue about this being the document that sets out fifty-fifty urban development. Indeed, that is there on page 43 of the published document. It sets out that a specific idea - it is not part of the key implementation principles - is to "achieve an urban renewal rate of at least 50 per cent of total urban development". Mr Speaker, I do not agree with that principle. That brings us back to the amendment that Ms McRae has put for "a clear commitment to the agreed outcomes of the 1993 Assembly's 2020 report". It seems to me that that puts a charge on you to find out what are the agreed outcomes of that report.

Mrs Carnell: We did not agree.

MR MOORE: You correctly say, "We have not agreed; the report was noted". What this motion says is that you have to find out what are the agreed outcomes. You need a participatory process to find out what are the agreed outcomes, so that you can proceed. So, in other words, you use it as a base. That is the same recommendation that I made to some of your officers on a number of occasions when they were beginning to prepare the strategic plan. "Do not do again all the work that the 2020 vision did", is what I suggested. "What you should do is build on the 2020 vision".

There are small elements in A Capital Future that illustrate that there has been an attempt to do it, but in such small ways compared to what was set out in this combination of documents. That is how they should be read, as a combination of documents; the 2020 documents, the Vision for Prosperity giving us a background, the principles, and so forth, and a vision of what we believe our Canberra should be. That vision is one that says, "We have a much healthier society". That is what it says. How are we going to get to that healthier society? Well, we have to follow some principles. That is stage 2. Stage 3 would be the implementation, or, if you like, the strategic implementation, of those principles; in other words, a strategic plan. That is what we are talking about. That is what should be done. That is the disappointment that those of us on this side of the house feel when we read the document that you have tabled and that you are now starting to distance yourself - - -

Mrs Carnell: No, not at all. We think it is great.

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