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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2000 Week 11 Hansard (28 November) . . Page.. 3284 ..

Mr Hargreaves: And the other bit Ossie owns.

Mr Quinlan: It is also a non-number, Mr Smyth.

MR SPEAKER: Order! I will have to ask the minister to repeat all of this answer if I cannot hear it.

MR SMYTH: Urban open space, about which there has been some debate lately, accounts for about 2 per cent of the land of the ACT, about 5,000 hectares. The majority of the land is conserved in conservation areas. That includes the parcels of land that the previous planning and environment minister put aside and that I have put aside and this government has put aside in places, such as the shifting of the Gungahlin town centre, saying that we will not develop the Jerrabomberra town centre and protecting yellow box/red gum.

Our tag of the bush capital is well deserved and this government believes that it is one that is worthy of retention. Part of the retention is making sure that we keep it for the future. What we need to do now is to develop a sustainable city. That is why this government has changed the rules made under Labor on how we build our new suburbs in terms of how the streetscape should look.

Labor wanted narrow public streetscapes and maximum room for development. We have changed the rules so that, much more in keeping with our park-like city, we will have things such as wider verges, room for big trees to grow and extra space for footpaths. That is why this government has said that only good quality and sustainable developments will be accepted, that they must take into account the surroundings and the impact on the environment.

Labor's planning vision so far has been based on making you afraid of the future. Here are some of the facts that Labor hopes you will not find if it scares you with enough misinformation. Let us start with the recent letterbox drop claiming that the government has a secret sell-off plan for this land. It was so secret that the government gave Labor the documents and none of them announced any sell-off. In fact, any land being considered for sale is put out in the public land release program document each year, and it has been out since June of this year. That is how Mr Corbell knows that the Curtin horse paddocks might be considered in the future.

I need to remind people what the Territory Plan says about broadacre. The classification "broadacre" and the use for horse paddocks were put there by Labor. That is right; it is not designated urban open space. Labor made that decision, not us, and it is a little hypocritical of them to criticise us now. It was Labor that developed the Territory Plan in 1993 and it said in that document that the Curtin horse paddocks should be zoned broadacre. Under its broadacre land use policies Labor said:

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