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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 01 Hansard (Wednesday, 11 February 2004) . . Page.. 222 ..

While we are talking about that, earlier in this debate Mr Smyth said that I had gone to the resident’s house after 5 o’clock on Friday, after the press release had come out from the minister, and that I had made no mention of the call-in powers when I visited one of the residents in Jackie Howe Crescent. While I was there the neighbours of this resident came in—they are in the gallery today—and they were very upset. I attempted to speak to them about the minister’s proposal—after his meeting with Mr Hargreaves, Mr Wood and me. (Further extension of time granted.) Mr Smyth has made the comment that I withheld the fact that the minister intended to call it in; that I had not told them. I took the press release that Mr Hargreaves, Mr Wood and I had put out. I will read from it:

During consideration of the DA and public comment by ACTPLA, the Minister for Planning will signal his intention to call-in the application.

It can be no more explicit than that. I really do take umbrage at the suggestion that I was trying to hide that. I confess that we had not got to that stage when the neighbours arrived in the house. The resident that I was visiting was reading through the press release that I had taken along. Then the neighbours came in and were very upset. They had already seen the minister’s press release, which talks about the call-in powers. At that point we started talking about the whole process. I had been trying to go through, in a staged way, exactly what would happen. But there was not the opportunity to get down to the press release that Mr Hargreaves, Mr Wood and I had put out that day in which we explicitly said that the development application would be called in after consultation—I repeat, after consultation—with the community.

I finish by making this comment: I have been getting lots of emails from people who are still confused about the process and what is happening now. Lots of things have been said today about the process being sneaky. I do not see how it can be considered sneaky to call it in after consultation; when you publicly advertise—through two press releases on behalf of the minister and a press release on behalf of the three Labor members from Brindabella—that the minister intends to, and flags that he will, call it in after consultation.

I take Ms Tucker’s point about being opposed to the call-in on the basis that it takes away the appeal rights. But I also understand the minister’s point in terms of it not going on for months and months. If this strings out for 12 to 18 months it will be more detrimental to the people sitting in the gallery today than if it were called in. Whatever the decision of the Assembly, I know that the minister will wear it.

Mr Hargreaves has just reminded me of one other piece which I believe was in our press release last week—it may not have been. The three Labor members for Brindabella were planning on—still are planning on; I think it will be going out to people’s letterboxes tomorrow—explaining to all the residents of Macarthur and Fadden so that they are fully informed. There will be a letter coming from the three of us to explain the process, because we want community consultation. We want to hear from the people in the gallery, and we want to hear from all the people who live in Macarthur and Fadden who have concerns about what the facility will entail. I have been trying to do my best to encourage people to give back that consultation.

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