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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2000 Week 6 Hansard (24 May) . . Page.. 1624 ..

MR CORBELL (continuing):

This bill will, for the first time since the commencement of self-government, establish an independent ACT planning authority. It also restores the position of chief planner for the Australian Capital Territory and, again, for the first time since self-government, the position will have statutory independence. There is a clear need for this bill. There is a clear need to restore integrity and transparency to land use planning decisions in the ACT. This government's record on land use planning is without credibility and without strategic direction. Its approach has been ad hoc and has been driven by the winds and vagaries of individual government minister's support for individual development proposals.

The rejected Federal Golf Club development is a prime example. Originally proposed and supported by the government in 1997, this project became too sensitive too close to an election, and was dumped by the then planning minister, Gary Humphries, with the commitment that the government would not consider it again. Immediately after the election, with the government safely re-elected, the new minister, Mr Smyth, again proposed a Territory Plan variation to allow the development to proceed. It took a disallowance motion in this Assembly to stop it.

This example highlights the problems with land use planning decisions in Canberra. Decisions about land use, decisions to vary the Territory Plan, are driven completely by the whim of the minister and the executive. The government argues that such decisions are policy driven, but the reality is that they are politically driven, often to suit the interests of individual proponents who have won the ear of the minister. This is not the way to plan for the future of Canberra. It is not the way to encourage integrity or transparency in land use planning in Canberra. In short, it is not the future direction for planning in this city that Canberrans want.

This bill establishes the position of chief planner for the Australian Capital Territory. The chief planner will perform the functions of the ACT Planning Authority. As members would be aware, the ACT Planning Authority is the body that formally proposes variations to the Territory Plan to the executive. But the ACT Planning Authority is, at the moment, a compromised body. It is not independent. Instead, its functions are performed by public servants who are directly responsible to the minister. They must implement the wishes of the minister. They cannot act independently of the executive, and they cannot act as independent counsel for the executive and the Assembly on planning issues. That is what this bill seeks to change.

The bill provides for the functions of the ACT Planning Authority to be performed by the chief planner. The bill explicitly states that the ACT Planning Authority will not be subject to any directions by the executive or the minister, except in certain circumstances specified in the bill. Even when a direction is made by the minister under these criteria, it must be in writing and it must be tabled in the Legislative Assembly within six sitting days of the minister giving such a direction.

I believe that this structure, which provides for the independence of the ACT Planning Authority while still allowing for ministerial directions within specific criteria, is the right balance needed to achieve a rigorous and transparent relationship between the Planning Authority-that is, the chief planner-and the minister.

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