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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2002 Week 14 Hansard (11 December) . . Page.. 4313 ..

MR CORBELL (continuing):

people who live in Tuggeranong and have a job leave the Tuggeranong Valley every morning to go to work.

We have very clear empirical evidence now that the location of office employment, of other employment, in a particular town centre over time sees a significant number of the people who work in that agency move to be closer to that agency. We have seen that in Tuggeranong with the location of the old department of social security in the early to mid-1980s. We see it also in Belconnen and in Woden with the large Commonwealth departments that are located there. People overwhelmingly choose to live closer to where they work. That, I think, only strengthens the decentralised nature of planning in Canberra and the provision of services in Canberra.

The final point I want to make is about Civic itself. Civic is, indeed, the first amongst equals. Civic is the pre-eminent employment location for the city and the pre-eminent cultural and social base for the city. The OECD study into the future of Canberra, its urban renaissance study, has highlighted the importance of building a vibrant Civic Centre as part of the success of the town centres overall. (Extension of time granted.) The role of Civic is an important one, and a thriving Civic does indeed, in my view, mean thriving town centres.

The polycentric nature, as the OECD liked to call it, of Canberra can be a great strength. I do not believe that it is an either/or; I do not believe that it is Civic or the town centres, or the airport. I believe that they all have a very important role to play. But it is about getting the balance right. It is about having the policies that encourage appropriate levels of activity, that meet our obligations and our aspirations as a community, through the appropriate planning controls. That is what this government is seeking to do through the Canberra spatial planning process.

In some ways, it is ironic that it takes the territory government to talk about strategic planning issues to get the national capital, the Commonwealth, engaged in the process. But so be it, Mr Speaker. Perhaps it is because we live here, perhaps it is because we feel passionate about our city, that we understand the importance of having a long-term strategic plan for the future of our city. The Canberra spatial planning process is one that can achieve that balance and that enhancement of the roles of Civic, of the town centres and of the airport, and that is what this motion primarily says. In a partnership, in a discussion, without pre-emptive outcomes, we can achieve the objectives and achieve the on-the-ground results that our city needs to grow and thrive into the future.

I commend Mr Hargreaves' motion to the Assembly.

MR SMYTH (Leader of the Opposition) (8.41): Mr Speaker, I cannot help feeling that this is an "I got rolled in caucus"motion, that it is the consolation prize for Mr Hargreaves for being rolled by his party after launching, in a fit of pique, into a motion that talked about subversion, denial, undermining and moratoriums.

When Mr Hargreaves lashed out on 24 September and put his original intemperate motion on the notice paper, I think that most of us looked at it and just said, "What is he going on about?"When you get the Chief Minister's press release of 12 November lauding the efforts of the Canberra International Airport, you can see why Mr Hargreaves' motion disappeared quickly and was replaced by the standard

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