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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 02 Hansard (Wednesday, 3 March 2004) . . Page.. 643 ..

Monash and a possible site in Hughes for residential aged care. Again, these sites require territory plan variations to permit residential aged care. The government will also very shortly be considering a proposal from the Mirinjani facility in Weston for a direct grant of land for a 32-bed extension of a residential care facility.

So the government is undertaking a range of issues to address this very important matter. We are not seeking to in any way delay the work that is needed to get these beds under way. The Assembly can complain, but at the end of the day the government authorities implement the planning policies as they are in the Land Act and the territory plan. If Mrs Dunne has a problem with the Land Act or the territory plan, let us hear from her how she would change them.

There is, of course, a range of things under way. The Land Development Agency and ACTPLA are engaged in discussions with a number of other organisations that have put forward proposals, or in some instances where there are actual development applications for the development of older persons accommodation. These projects are at various stages and may not necessarily result in the development occurring, but it does indicate a strong interest from the provider sector in older persons accommodation in the territory. As part of its land sales program the Land Development Agency considers the suitability of a requirement to build independent living units in sites sold for residential purposes or release the sites for that purpose only. Sites in Greenway, Watson, Fadden and Gowrie fall within this category.

I have mentioned the issue of territory plan variations. Variations have been made to the territory plan that are designed to improve the ability of organisations to provide accommodation suitable for the aged. In September 2002 the territory plan was varied to introduce the concept of supported housing. Members may not be aware that supported housing is residential accommodation with onsite support provided for people who need such services, usually because of age or disability. The housing may be self-contained dwellings and there is a requirement that the development be managed by a territory approved organisation that has the capacity to provide the necessary support and services.

In regard to land that has a community facility land use policy, the territory plan was varied in 2002 to include supported housing subject to such a proposal meeting specified controls and restrictions; for example, where it can be demonstrated that the land is no longer required for other community facilities, or where such housing can only be separately titled if the lease requires the consent of the territory prior to any dealing with the lease. These additional controls are required in order to protect the integrity of community facility land and to ensure that it is used for genuine supported housing and not exploited as de facto multiunit residential development.

Again, this is not burdensome bureaucracy. These are all controls, planning law, approved by this place and, in the context of supported housing, approved by this Assembly in the term of this Assembly. No concerns were raised by members when these laws were introduced. It is unreasonable for Mrs Dunne or others to stand up and say that this is burdensome bureaucracy—when they voted for it; they approved the policy setting. Well, nothing has changed. The policy setting is being implemented. The policy setting approved by the Liberal Party in this place, in this very Assembly during this very term, is being implemented.

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