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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 8 Hansard (27 August) . . Page.. 2543 ..

MS TUCKER (continuing):

I know that this is local government. I am not suggesting that we can do it here, but as Australians we should remember how many people are suffering around the world. Through Federal Government policies and as individuals, we should support community organisations trying to bring about social change in other countries around the world. We should take part in that.

When tragedy happens to us, as it did at Thredbo, it brings home to us the reality and the horror of events we see in other parts of the world and can cause us to work in a more generous and thoughtful way to support other people in less fortunate places than Australia who have to deal with these sorts of tragedies on a regular basis. I join members in praising the work of our rescue workers and in expressing great sympathy for those people who lost people they cared for.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

MR MOORE (4.10): I present Report No. 28 of the Standing Committee on Planning and Environment, entitled "Draft Variation to the Territory Plan No. 76: Residential Land Use Policies - Area Specific Policy: Palmerston Section 142 Blocks 7 & 8 and Section 143 Blocks 8 & 9", together with a copy of extracts of the minutes of proceedings. This report was provided to the Speaker for circulation on Tuesday, 8 July 1997, pursuant to the resolution of appointment. I move:

That the report be noted.

This draft variation proposes to vary the residential land use policies with reference to five dwellings for aged persons on section 142, blocks 7 and 8, and five dwellings for aged persons on section 143, blocks 8 and 9, Palmerston. It surprised us in some ways that we should already be looking at a variation to Palmerston, which was planned reasonably recently. Quite clearly, the planning of the area had not taken into account that aged persons would move into Palmerston, most likely to be closer to their families. It became clear that there was a need there. The committee had no difficulty with this variation to the Territory Plan and felt that it was entirely appropriate.

We were conscious of the recent move by the Government to ensure that there should be no variations for dual occupancy or for multiunit development within five years of the development of the suburb. My recollection is that Palmerston is just outside that time anyway. Nevertheless, it was quite clear that this draft variation was important to meet a particular need, so the committee was happy to support it.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

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