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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 06 Hansard (Wednesday, 23 June 2004) . . Page.. 2582 ..

Question so resolved in the negative.

MS TUCKER (9.34): I seek leave to move the two amendments circulated in my name on the revised sheet.

Leave granted.

MS TUCKER: I move:

(1) omit paragraph 1(d); and

(2) omit paragraph 2(c), substitute:

“2(c) ensures ACTPLA is able to reflect its independent decision making capacity by being freely available to brief Members of the Assembly on those planning matters, at the discretion of the Chief Planning Executive.”.

MR CORBELL (Minister for Health and Minister for Planning) (9.35): We obviously preferred the approach outlined in my amendments. However, given that the Assembly does not support those this evening, the government will reluctantly support these amendments. I think it is worth making some comment in the context of the debate. I am sure everyone in this place can find an instance where someone is unhappy with a planning or development approval. It is the nature of the process.

It is the nature of development assessment that someone, somewhere, at some time will be unhappy with a decision. But that does not mean that there is some systemic failure of development assessment in this city. When you look at the number of development assessments made every year in this city, which is somewhere over 4,000, and the number that go to formal review, which is fewer than 200 in any year, we are talking about a very small number that result in formal review and appeal to the AAT. We are talking even less than 10 per cent of the total number of development applications or approvals granted. It is all very well for Mr Cornwell or Mrs Cross to stand up and say, “Look, we have a problem with this development application, and that shows that the system is in crisis.” It is simply not the case.

It is legitimate in individual circumstances to highlight flaws of the system overall and to say, “These things can be improved; these things can be done better.” I do not object to that. You use those case studies to improve your process, to improve your system. But to simply say, “I know of a problem; therefore the whole system isn’t working” is a very long bow to draw.

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