Page 4047 - Week 13 - Wednesday, 13 December 2006
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Audit did not examine and form an opinion on the impact of the approved Austexx development on the ACT retail hierarchy, or its consistency with the National Capital Plan.
Another article in the Canberra Times says that the jury is still out on that one. They have not reported and audit understands that following ACTPLA’s approval of the Austexx DA the NCA is conducting an assessment of this matter itself. So the jury is still out there.
There are some other significant issues. I think the points made by the auditor at page 49 at points 3.88 and 3.89 are also somewhat telling:
ACTPLA has a responsibility to provide clear and unambiguous advice to the community about planning matters. However, Audit observed that in dealing with inquiries during the sale process, ACTPLA did not always provide a clear and responsive reply to legitimate and straightforward inquiries about specific planning controls, such as whether the land use controls apply to the whole of a lease or individual shops within the lease.
It is really very basic stuff indeed, crucial to this particular sale. The auditor goes on to say:
This is not consistent with good public administration or with a goal included in the ACTPLA ‘Code of Service’, which advises ACTPLA’s customers that ACTPLA will:
… Listen to you and look for practical ways of helping to resolve any issues you may have in dealing with us; …
Provide information that is accurate, complete and easy to understand; …
The auditor goes on:
For example, inquirers were typically advised to carry out their own commercial due diligence and to rely on their own judgement. A more responsive approach might have identified a general theme among the inquiries and sought to deal effectively with that matter in a manner that was ‘accurate, complete and easy to understand’. Both ACTPLA and LDA would serve the public better if they have provided, as an addendum to the sale documents, an appropriate and clear interpretation of the specific planning controls of the Territory Plan as applied to the site.
Mr Speaker, this motion by the minister is a nonsense. It will be carried because the government have the numbers, but quite clearly what it does is censure a man who is doing his job properly.
Mrs Dunne: Nobody is jumping to support Mr Corbell.
MR SMYTH (Brindabella) (11.38): Yes, it is true: nobody is jumping to Mr Corbell’s support on his side. It is interesting that when this debate started all on this side paid attention. What did the Deputy Chief Minister do? She was doing
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .