Page 4139 - Week 13 - Thursday, 14 December 2006

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


another level of complexity. The ACT is no different, having the further layer of the leasehold system, but the potential benefit, in the main, of being a single level of government.

The governance arrangements for planning have in the past also been subject to political interference and undue influence. This can have the impact of reducing public confidence in the process and impinging on the appropriateness of some planning outcomes.

There has been a focus on regulations and statutes at the cost of sound forward planning and policy development. In some circumstances, whilst there has been an admirable desire to achieve consensus planning, this has resulted in unacceptable delays in the delivery of outcomes and raised unrealistic expectations.

Combined, these pressures have contributed to the development over time of a planning system that is now resource intensive to administer, does not provide certainty, is unresponsive to change and innovation, is lengthy to work through and can be inconsistent in its application.

Of course, Mr Speaker, there will never be a perfect planning system, because of the wide range of views, vested interests, value judgments and understandable emotion associated with things that are precious to people. Because of this, not all points of view can always be accommodated, and any system that is devised will continue to be the subject of public and political scrutiny, as well as media interest.

I now want to focus on the intended aims of the reform process, which have been to simplify and streamline the territory’s planning and land administration system so that it:

• has a clear purpose and intent;

• ensures timeliness in decision making;

• promotes greater certainty and consistency while maintaining sufficient flexibility to encourage innovation and high quality design;

• contributes to the achievement of sustainable outcomes;

• recognises the opportunity for planning to contribute to social equity;

• provides appropriate opportunities for community engagement in the planning process;

• supports a properly functioning property market;

• increases operational efficiency, integrates development and building assessment processes and reduces administrative complexity and repetition; and

• enhances the administration of the leasehold system so that it continues to contribute to the orderly development of the territory.


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