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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 4 Hansard (7 May) . . Page.. 1075 ..

MS McRAE (continuing):

he was quoted in the Canberra Times as saying he had become tired of it all - but they have caused a very high level of consternation within the community. People now believe that it is possible to get rid of B1 altogether and that if we go down Mr Moore's path we might not allow dual occupancies unless they are predetermined in the Territory Plan.

I do not agree with that approach. I am confident that the process of the Territory Plan did establish sensible zoning for redevelopment. Now mischief is being done, and I am very unhappy that people earnestly believe that through my vote I could abolish B1 and that I am being lobbied on that basis. I think it is walking away from a very thorough process of consultation leading up to B1. We are now reconsulting and refining the process. As I said, I applaud the level of detail with which that is being gone into, but I am very unhappy that it has taken so long.

I do not believe that we have abrogated our responsibility in terms of dual occupancies throughout the rest of Canberra. By the time you finish consulting with everyone on earth, plus every blade of grass, plus the sky, it is almost impossible to get a dual occupancy. Let me not be silly. They are just, sensible and thorough rules that some people object to. Other people do not object to dual occupancies, but they have to go through a very thorough consultative process which has been worked through. I do not walk away from that. I think we should applaud the people who diligently set about trying to establish rules that satisfy people.

I do not support the idea of reopening the notion of somebody designating some blocks for dual occupancies and some not. We must remember that a dual occupancy can be simply an additional quite small room with a kitchen in it. If we allow that, I do not see any reason to go down the path that Mr Moore has suggested. Mr Moore may not see the connection between dual occupancy and B1, but other people do. I am flagging now that we should very rapidly get back into the B1 debate and complete it. A growing body of people believe that Mr Moore, in good faith, has put in legislation to abolish B1 but that a major disappointment is looming for the Government with this legislation still before the Assembly. It raises people's aspirations and hopes, I think unfairly and inappropriately but in a way which we may end up acting on.

All of this arises because of delays in B1 that I have been gentle about. The slowness of this variation coming before the committee perhaps indicates some lack of attention to detail in the Minister's office. I hope this has served as a lesson and that the Minister will give us some guidance - I do not care about an explanation - as to how this will be avoided in the future. One cannot underestimate the depth of emotion and energy that some people are willing to put into these issues. We probably know them all personally. Collectively in the Assembly, we could probably list them. I respect their rights to get involved in these debates. I am very concerned that by our collective activities here we are feeding that frenzy and opening up hope that B1 may be abolished or that all dual occupancies may be signed up in the plan on paper before people have even put in an application.

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