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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 06 Hansard (Wednesday, 23 June 2004) . . Page.. 2560 ..

MR SPEAKER: The matter under Mrs Dunne’s name, which is notice No 4, came on immediately before Mrs Dunne moved to suspend for lunch and it fell off the notice paper as a result. Mrs Dunne either has to have leave to bring it back on again or to suspend standing orders.

Leave granted.

MRS DUNNE: I move:

That this Assembly:

(1) notes:

(a) it is now a year since the establishment of the ACT Planning and Land Authority;

(b) the failure of the Stanhope Government to establish a clear and trusted process of community consultation;

(c) the increasing lack of confidence of the community in the planning process;

(d) the lack of independence of the ACT Planning and Land Authority; and

(e) the lack of access of Members of the Legislative Assembly to advice from the ACT Planning and Land Authority; and

(2) calls on the ACT Government to restore confidence in the ACT planning system by:

(f) establishing a process of consultation which is widely accepted in the community;

(g) working towards a truly integrated planning approvals system; and

(h) ensuring that the ACT Planning and Land Authority is truly an independent body by allowing Members of the Legislative Assembly free and unhindered access to the advice from the Chief Planning Executive and his staff.

I thank the Assembly for its indulgence and apologise for the inattention that caused this to drop off the notice paper. As the motion says, next Thursday marks the ACT Planning and Land Authority’s first anniversary. It is now an appropriate time for us to reflect on what has happened in that year.

In December 2002, when the legislation was passed, it was largely opposed by the Liberal opposition, but this was not blind opposition—opposition for its own sake. I said at the time, “We believe that some of what is being suggested may be an appropriate solution, but it is certainly being suggested at the wrong time.” This was reinforced by the recommendations of the Standing Committee on Planning and Environment in its inquiry into the Planning and Land Bill and associated legislation, when it said, “The committee recommends to the Assembly that this legislation not be rushed through to meet artificial deadlines”, and later, “The committee reaffirms its view that the long term outcome of the government’s reform process will be improved if more time is allowed for consideration of this legislation.”

At the time, Mr Speaker, I asked what the situation would be like six months after the act came into operation and I think it is now time to reflect on that. We have reflected a little in the past. However, the minister at the time, in December 2002, ploughed ahead. To be

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