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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 06 Hansard (Wednesday, 23 June 2004) . . Page.. 2570 ..

It is clear that there are exciting times ahead for planning. The further reforms outlined above are priorities in the work program of ACTPLA and work is now progressing on all of these proposals so that further information can be made to interested parties and to involve all those people.

I’d like now to quickly address the issue of Legislative Assembly members’ access to free and unhindered advice from the chief planning executive and his staff. ACTPLA is an independent authority. You only have to read the legislation to see that. I, as minister, do not and cannot intervene in those matters for which I no longer have an authority under the legislation. This does not mean that, on occasions when matters are drawn to my attention by members of the public or the Assembly, I do not question the decisions of ACTPLA; nor does it mean that I always agree with those decisions.

But I can dispel the myth that the motion tries to cement that the authority is not independent in those matters for which it has been established to make decisions at arm’s length from the government. I will again remind the Assembly which government introduced this degree of independence. This government. (Extension of time granted.) The Assembly, through me as the Minister for Planning and through its committees, already has access to the authority’s expertise. The planning and environment committee is able to call the chief planning executive on behalf of the authority to give advice on issues that are before the committee for its consideration.

Added to this, Mrs Dunne’s motion proposes to add further work and stress on the capacity of ACTPLA which would need to service what would be another significant increase in inquiries. This again would take them away from their core business of actually servicing the community. I have to say that there is also the enormous potential for this privilege to be abused and add further pressures and tension between the authority and the community and could be exploited by some people who see it as another avenue to have someone represent and apply pressure for their issue, having failed through other available mechanisms. When this happens, no matter how Mrs Dunne tries to mask it, this would be political interference within what is an independent authority—an independent authority proposed by this government, with the support of the community, and endorsed by this Assembly.

Access to the authority by members of the Assembly cannot be regarded, by itself, as a measure of its independence. It has been recognised practice and courtesy by all sides of politics that an approach to a government department should be through the office of the relevant minister. Just as members may be concerned about the hand of the minister in relation to the activities of government departments, so too should the minister have the right to be concerned about the ability of an Assembly member, be it in good faith or not, to interfere improperly with the business of a government agency.

ACTPLA is a government department for the purposes of its policy role and is not independent from government policy. It is in its decision-making role that it is at arm’s length and, as I have stated earlier, whilst I have views on some decisions—on occasions I either disagree with these and/or seek briefings—I do not interfere in this role. I cannot, under the legislation. And this is what I expect of other members who, if they wish to seek a briefing, I believe, should do so by first of all advising my office so that I can be

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