Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .
Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2000 Week 7 Hansard (27 June) . . Page.. 2088 ..
I am concerned, because people in the community are making their very strong feelings on this heard. These people represent local communities. Mr Smyth has not addressed the issues. In fact, he even misrepresented what the amendments do. I want to put on the record my concern about that.
Question put:
That the amendments (Ms Tucker's ) be agreed to.
The Assembly voted- Ayes, 7 Noes, 8 Mr Corbell Ms Carnell Mr Hargreaves Mr Cornwell Mr Osborne Mr Hird Mr Quinlan Mr Humphries Mr Stanhope Mr Kaine Ms Tucker Mr Rugendyke Mr Wood Mr Smyth Mr Stefaniak
Question so resolved in the negative.
MS TUCKER (10.02): I move:
Clause 15, page 6, line 14, paragraph (a), proposed new subsection 243(2), omit the subsection.
I am putting up this amendment, which omits a change the government is proposing, because the government's legislation conflicts with the passing of my private members bill that affected third-party appeal rights.
Section 243 of the act is about who should be notified of a decision to approve or refuse a development application where appeal rights are available. At present everyone who was originally notified about the submission of a development application, such as people in all the neighbouring properties, are notified about the decision on the application.
The government is proposing to change this so that only those people who object to the application are notified of the decision. The reasoning behind this is that those people who have not put in an objection are either supportive of the application or are not interested and therefore it is wasteful to send out further letters to them. I can accept this part of the bill. However, the bill goes on and does something new. The government has inserted a new subsection 243(2) which excludes the notification of objectors where the development application has been the subject of an environmental impact assessment.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .