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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2000 Week 11 Hansard (30 November) . . Page.. 3539 ..

MR CORBELL (4:29): Mr Deputy Speaker, this report is an important one. It is one which in some respects predates the more visible public debate about the role of urban open space in our community. When this master plan was first presented to the community-indeed, at the time that it was referred to the standing committee by this place-it identified a range of areas of urban open space for residential or commercial development.

It is interesting to note that in the context of the government's recent commitment, if you can believe it, to no longer investigate areas of urban space for residential development. If this government had been serious about that commitment for a period, it never would have allowed a master plan such as this one even to get to the stage of being released.

Mr Humphries: That was before the commitment was made.

MR CORBELL: I hear the Chief Minister say that it was before his announcement. Indeed, it was before his announcement, but I thought that this government had a longstanding commitment to urban open space and that the Chief Minister's announcement was simply a reiteration of policy. Clearly, Mr Deputy Speaker, the only reason the Chief Minister made his commitment a couple of Saturdays ago was that the political heat in relation to this issue was becoming too much.

I think that this report says a lot about the actions, rather than the words, of this government. It says a lot about the actions of this Chief Minister rather than his words. The actions were quite clear as far back as 2 September last year when this master plan was first released. It is quite clear that the government's agenda had always been to examine areas of urban open space for residential development. It has been only since the full scale of the government's agenda has become apparent that the government has backed down.

Mr Deputy Speaker, this document was referred to the Standing Committee on Planning and Urban Services because of community concern about the loss of urban open space which this document proposed. Even back then the government had a clear warning that the community was unhappy with the prospect of having urban open space used for other purposes.

I am pleased to join my colleagues on the committee, Mr Hird and Mr Rugendyke, in unanimously recommending that the areas of urban open space designated as such and subject to this master plan remain as urban open space. I only wish that this government had shown its strong commitment to urban open space issues back then, rather than having to be dragged kicking and screaming to it a couple of weeks ago.

Mr Deputy Speaker, the only other comment I would like to make is in relation to the comments by Mr Hird about resourcing, which is a matter of some concern to the Standing Committee on Planning and Urban Services. This committee has important statutory obligations under the land act. Also, by the nature of its portfolio coverage, it receives many other referrals of a local or municipal nature from the Assembly, as well as one or two that are self-referred by the committee.

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