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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2001 Week 1 Hansard (14 February) . . Page.. 175 ..

MR SMYTH (continuing):

act. As I have said, we have this dichotomy between public and professional views on what best to do and how best to achieve it, but the government did what it was asked. It was asked to review-

Mr Kaine: No, it did not.

MR SMYTH: The government did what it was asked. It was asked to review the Territory Plan. (Extension of time granted). The Oxford Dictionary definition of "review" is to reconsider or to revise. It has been reconsidered. It has been carried out in accordance with what the Assembly wanted.

I think that it would be setting a very dangerous precedent for the Assembly to be asking for a review with a predetermined outcome. That would not be a review. If that is the way that the Labor Party would operate in government, it would be a very interesting style of government, Mr Speaker. If what we would get from Labor would be false reviews, phoney reviews and predetermined outcomes it would make a mockery of the situation. Ms Tucker is the one who always talks to us about community consultation and an honest and open process. What we are having here is the notion that a review should have a predetermined outcome. You ought to be ashamed of yourself for even attempting to put that forward.

Mr Speaker, the government has done what was requested of it. It had a review of the plan in the context of variation 114 and how best to protect the heritage value of Old Red Hill. We have done that. If the opposition had wanted something different, perhaps they should have been more open at the start. If they did not want a review but a predetermined outcome, they should have put it on the record that this place sees itself above experts.

We are often called on to make decisions. That is what we are employed for, that is what we are elected for and that is what we put ourselves forward for. If what we get down to is "my expert is better than your expert", then I guess we will never achieve anything in this place. I think that what we were able to achieve through variation 114 was a huge step forward on what was there previously and it will secure the Old Red Hill precinct into the future.

The government is currently reviewing all the citations on the other heritage precincts to take the Heritage Council out of the AAT, to make them clear so that it is beyond dispute how we protect those heritage values, those things that we cherish in the various examples of precincts around our city that really are landmarks on the path of the development of the nation's capital, and they should be protected. We differ on whether dual occupancy is appropriate in Old Red Hill. That is a matter of opinion, and that is what it will get down to here this evening. It will get down to a matter of opinion. But the executive did as it was asked and PALM did as it was asked by conducting a review of the plan.

I believe that the outcomes of the review are acceptable and strengthen what was achieved and was acknowledged in this place as having been achieved in variation 114. If the Assembly so decides now to recommend to the executive that PALM be directed to implement that, I will see what happens when the vote gets up. I hope that it will not come to that, because we have done what we were asked to do and the consultants, the

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