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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1999 Week 2 Hansard (11 March) . . Page.. 613 ..

MR CORBELL

face of the development of the ACT and subregion strategy, ignored the five or six years of work put into the development of the subregion strategy, which was premised on the basis that rural residential development would not occur in the ACT and that demand for rural residential development from the ACT would be met by the surrounding shires.

Mr Temporary Deputy Speaker, this paper has so compromised that element of the subregion strategy that there are now shire councils surrounding the ACT which are contemplating allowing development in areas of land that were previously reserved for future metropolitan expansion of the national capital. That is what this planning Minister has done. He has, effectively, jeopardised the future metropolitan structure of the national capital by his decision and by this Government's decision to pursue rural residential development in the ACT.

Let me explain why. If the ACT Government thinks that the subregion strategy does not matter and that it can just go ahead with rural residential development in the ACT, then why on earth should shire councils that surround the ACT continue to freeze parts of their land which they could quite effectively use for rural residential development just in case the ACT wants to expand? Clearly, those councils are going to say, "The ACT is going ahead and doing its own thing. We will, too, because we will get some money from this land". I refer to land such as Gooromon-Jeir to the north of Hall which has been set aside on a longstanding basis for the future expansion of the ACT urban structure.

That is what this planning Minister has done, Mr Temporary Deputy Speaker. Some planning Minister! The planning Minister jeopardises plans that extend way beyond the life of self-government - back into the days of the NCDC - about the future metropolitan structure of the ACT, plans that are still accepted as part of the subregion strategy about the future urban development of the ACT. But he does not care about that. He just wants to release a few blocks of land quick smart, get a bit of cash and forget about the long-term planning consequences. That, unfortunately, is what has occurred through the strategy.

The independence of this paper is a matter of inadequacy. The Minister presented it as independent, the Minister argued that it was an independent assessment of the Government's policy approach; yet we have been able to reveal that it was far from that - that it was massaged, that the report was biased to suit the Government's position. It has been released on that basis, Mr Temporary Deputy Speaker. It has been released on that basis and it has been responded to by community organisations on that basis. That, to me, is a misleading of the community as to the independence of this study.

There is one final point that I want to make, Mr Temporary Deputy Speaker. It is in relation to the Minister's comment that, if it was so inadequate, why did not any Assembly member take the opportunity to comment when it went out for consultation. That is a bizarre and naive comment. It is bizarre and naive because everyone in this place knows that, unlike a citizen in the community, members of this place have far more opportunities to influence the policy approach - to influence the policy approach for government, to influence proposals put forward by government - through this Assembly and through its committees. We are in a privileged position in that regard. It is appropriate that the community provide the input and the comments that they believe are appropriate at the stage the Government provides that opportunity to them, as it should,

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