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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2002 Week 5 Hansard (7 May) . . Page.. 1224 ..

MR CORBELL (continuing):

In this context it is important to note that land release and land availability in the territory are a unique set of circumstances, because the government controls all raw land, unlike in other jurisdictions, where there is a mix of both private and public land ownership.

What we essentially try to achieve in the territory is the release of land in such a way as to meet broader planning objectives, which of course are community objectives, to ensure appropriate location and type of residential development and construction of housing and steady, sustainable growth of retail and commercial activities. In releasing land, the territory must be vigilant to ensure it does not allow oversupply, which would impact upon Canberrans and impact upon investment.

The proposed Commonwealth land releases, whilst they are consistent with the Territory Plan, do not take account of broader territory planning or strategies. The Commonwealth must start to undertake land release in full consultation with the ACT government. That, unfortunately, has not happened to date.

The Commonwealth has recently announced the sale of a 55,000-square metre site in Tuggeranong. This is in contrast to planned land releases in the Tuggeranong town centre of only 20,000 square metres over the next five years. The Commonwealth is proposing to release in one hit nearly 10 years worth of retail land supply in the Tuggeranong town centre. What is that going to do to land values in Tuggeranong? What is that going to do for those people who have invested in commercial land in Tuggeranong? It is going to grossly distort the market.

It has been argued by the relevant Commonwealth minister that the territory has no grounds for argument or complaint, because we are simply trying to protect our own land sales, because we sell land for a profit and we are annoyed that the Commonwealth is going to sell land and take away some of that market. That is a nonsense argument. The territory releases land to meet it social, economic, planning and environmental objectives. It does so by frequently imposing on sales conditions that reduce revenue. For instance, we put in place provisions for parks, conservation areas and additional stormwater and environmental measures. These all reduce the return from any land sale. In contrast, the Commonwealth does none of that.

It is also important to note that a significant proportion of land revenues goes to the provision of infrastructure to service that land. Trunk roads, sewerage facilities and other water and electricity facilities are all paid for in one way or another by the territory, resourced from the revenues we get from land sales. The Commonwealth imposes no such conditions, and the Commonwealth does not make any provision through its land sales to pay for the infrastructure needed to service the land they are selling. Instead, the Commonwealth is simply passing that cost on to territory taxpayers. It is this government's view that the Commonwealth's completely unreasonable and uncooperative approach should no longer be tolerated.

Let me paint a picture for members. What is going to happen if the Commonwealth decides to sell land which currently makes up all of the proposed suburb of Crace? Currently the Commonwealth owns all of the land designated for the suburb of Crace. What would happen if they decided, "We are going to sell that land, because we need a bit of money"? All of a sudden the territory's planning provision would be completely thrown out of whack. It would disrupt major planning for the provision of facilities such

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