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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2001 Week 4 Hansard (28 March) . . Page.. 1087 ..

MR KAINE (continuing):

mean changes in public attitudes to planning. I submit that that is a non sequitur. People's attitudes to planning do not change simply because the demographics change.

There is a very high level of expectation from this community, which is often disappointed, in the performance of the government. But their expectations have not changed much in the 12 years I have been in this place. Their expectations still are that the government will deliver good planning policy, and that good planning policy will not include constantly increasing the plot ratio. If this goes on, we will have a plot ratio of 100 per cent. Mrs Burke and members of the government will say, "Oh, that is because of changing demographics." It has nothing to do with changing demographics.

People's attitudes to overshadowing do not change either. I do not believe I am the only member of this place who receives letters from time to time from people complaining about their properties being overshadowed by new buildings that are being constructed adjacent. People get very upset about that. But we are changing the provisions about overshadowing.

We are changing the provisions about building height; we are changing the provisions about overshadowing; we are changing the provisions about plot ratio; and we are saying to everybody, "We are going to implement it today, and you have two months to comment on it." And the minister says to members of this place, "Oh, and by the way, you would do well to have a comprehensive briefing on this matter from my departmental officers." Putting the cart before the horse is one thing, but this is ridiculous.

The document says that, in accordance with the Land (Planning and Environment) Act 1991, this draft variation is to have interim effect for the defined period, and so on. I would not mind that being put in the document if it were a minor amendment that was being proposed. Maybe that would be acceptable in that case, but this is in no way a minor variation to the Territory Plan. Look at it-pages of it, a whole volume of it.

I have already asked the minister to explain the practical effect of putting this variation into "interim" effect. What does that mean? Does it mean that it is somehow less effective? I am not too sure what the qualification in the minister's covering letter that says this document will take interim effect this Thursday means. Either it takes effect or it does not. In fact, if you read the document itself, you will see that it clearly does take effect in an unqualified manner. What the use of the term "interim effect" in the minister's covering letter means I am not clear.

It is quite clear that the government seems to have lost the plot completely with community consultation. Mrs Burke said the community wants to be involved in consultation on this matter. She was dead right on that, but to implement it first and then say, "We will consult with you afterwards" is a very strange way for the government to go about its business. I have to say it is not inconsistent with much of what the government has done over the last three years. I suppose that if they stay in government it will be consistent with what they propose to do for the next three years.

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