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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2003 Week 3 Hansard (12 March) . . Page.. 962 ..

MS TUCKER (continuing):

it wants and what the government would like to deliver on the basis of its understanding of what the community wants and needs.

This motion focuses on two things the community is seeking-the long-awaited permanent library to replace the temporary one the community has been required to make do with for some 12 years and a master plan for Kippax to guide its future development.

On the issue of the master plan, the government holds the view that its planning has already gone beyond what a master plan can deliver and that embarking on such a process would merely set back the government's earnest intentions to deliver these community facilities to the people of Kippax. Further, it holds that a master plan is not necessary, because there is not a great deal of unleased land in Kippax to be planned for.

So the government will say to the Kippax community, "You do not need a master plan. This is what you need."But the trouble is that the community is by no means convinced of this. The community believes that up to now developer-led planning, ad hoc development and neglect of the community's concerns have been the big problem for Kippax and that a community-centred master planning exercise could be an effective tool to get the balance right. They see that the process has delivered good results in Jamison and hope for a similarly positive outcome for Kippax.

Again, it is for the government to try to win the confidence of the Kippax community and satisfy community members that all is well in hand and that indeed they do not need a master plan to protect them from the threat of poor planning driven by development proposals at the expense of the broader community.

Given that the government has not convinced the community, or me, of its view that a master plan for Kippax is not necessary, it is appropriate for me to support the call for one in this Assembly. I note that Ms Dundas has amendments to her motion that soften the requirement to produce a master plan. I have concerns about the amendments, and I will expand on them.

On the library issue, I expect the government will reassure the community that it recognises the need and is acting on it as expeditiously as it can. The minister has been stalling on the community's persistent call to designate the site of the library and community centre on Hardwick Crescent, on blocks 15, 16 and 53 of section 51, which is now vacant and unleased. Indeed, after much consultation, the previous Assembly planning committee-of which the current minister, Simon Corbell, was a member-unanimously recommended that this be the designated site.

The community has been calling for this site to be confirmed so that the money allocated for design work can be spent and the process got under way. They are concerned that the allocated money is not being used and that it may disappear on them, as I think happened with the Charnwood skate park money.

We now know that the reason the minister has delayed is that the government-whether it is PALM or the minister himself who is driving this-wants the library and the community centre to go on another site, albeit still on Hardwood Crescent but on the

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