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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2003 Week 6 Hansard (17 June) . . Page.. 1924 ..

demand for industrial land from individual business and leases blocks to meet requirements. The draft variation process and committee hearings provided an opportunity for small business to raise their concerns.

PALM considered all submissions made. However, it is not possible to meet the expectations and desires of all respondents whilst maintaining sound planning practices. Decisions about land use are established on the fundamental principle of meeting metropolitan planning objectives for the benefit of the whole community rather than just for the benefit of individual lessees.

In relation to recommendation 2 of the committee, seeking acceptance by the government of full responsibility to ensure suitable methods of notification are employed to guarantee relevant stakeholders are notified: I will respond in this way: the government agrees and is committed to taking all reasonable action to ensure that relevant stakeholders are notified. However, it is simply not possible to absolutely guarantee that any extensive consultation practice will not miss notifying someone who can claim stakeholder status.

Planning and Land Management is unaware of any consultation practice that is flawless in this regard. The disappointing aspect of the committee recommendation is that the committee did not include suggestions on how the existing PALM process could be improved.

Mr Speaker, the government has not agreed with committee recommendation 4; has noted recommendation 5 concerning blocks 11 and 12 section 30 in Fyshwick, the old DAS site; and does not agree with committee recommendation 6, concerning block 1 section 22 Mitchell, the former brickworks site. Agreeing to these recommendations would have significant strategic planning ramifications and would also not allow affected stakeholders an opportunity to comment on the changes.

The government, therefore, proposes to retain the existing precinct classification for these areas and consider the merits of the proposals through the spatial plan process. This will allow the proposals to be considered in the strategic context and provide an opportunity for public input. The committee report has been referred to the spatial planning team in PALM for the consideration of comments made.

For similar reasons, the government also does not agree with the committee's recommendation 10 relating to west Fyshwick. Amongst other things, this recommendation would allow bulky goods retailing along Canberra Avenue, with the potential to significantly impact on the retail hierarchy in the nearby established areas of Kingston and Manuka and other sites in Fyshwick precinct "b"areas. The potential for several bulky goods retail outlets to congregate in this location also has strategic planning implications.

This is a policy change that is not appropriate to introduce without undertaking extensive consultation with all relevant stakeholders. I think the Assembly would agree that most changes to planning policies should be subject to the same rigorous planning consultation process as is undertaken for a draft variation.

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