Page 1774 - Week 07 - Tuesday, 21 August 2007
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
burden placed on the applicant, it will also remove an administrative burden on ACTPLA staff. The bill will also widen the range of exempt structures not requiring building approval. The opposition supports both this change and the acknowledgement from the government that a regulatory framework is still required to maintain building standards in the ACT. The onus placed on private sector building certifiers is a further positive step in reducing the red tape involved in the planning process and is therefore supported. But as I touched on earlier, it will now be particularly incumbent on the government to regulate this area properly to ensure the integrity of this system. If this is not properly regulated then that will fundamentally undermine the code track assessments.
In concluding my comments on the main bill, notwithstanding the fairly significant concerns which I have outlined in relation to some parts of the bill and to which I will be moving amendments, the opposition will be supporting the bill in principle. It is a step forward from the system which we have now. I repeat that, regardless of what is in the bill, the territory plan and the administration of it are crucial to how this system will work in practice. I am grateful to ACTPLA staff, as I told them at our briefing, for making draft regulations available for us to consider. We have not had a chance to consider them in detail but we will certainly be considering them over the coming weeks and months. As I said to staff at the time, I think that is a good way to deal with legislation because it allows members of the Assembly to properly consider all of these things together. The regulations will make up a very important part of this legislative package.
I call on the government to improve the bill by supporting our amendments. Our amendments will plug some of the holes that are left there. I note that there are well over 100 government amendments. I welcome the fact that they have been prepared to move on a number of issues. Many of those amendments are technical and consequential. (Extension of time granted.) They are amendments which would significantly improve the legislation. We in the Liberal opposition do want to see this system work. We want this legislation to be good legislation. We want the new territory plan to work, and we want it to be a well-drafted territory plan.
If the government misses this opportunity, it will be quite a tragedy. There is an opportunity here to fix or significantly improve the planning system. There are still some holes in this legislation but we think it is much better than what we have at the moment, so we will be supporting the bill in principle. I look forward to debating some of the other issues that I have raised in more detail when we come to the detail of the amendments.
DR FOSKEY (Molonglo) (5.40): First of all I want to acknowledge the work done by ACTPLA officers on the huge pile of legislation and amendments that are before us. I know that over the last two years they have worked, probably beyond the call of duty, to try to explain the changes to community organisations, to stakeholders, and basically to anyone who would listen. If there are people who are surprised by this legislation, and I maintain that there will be, it will not be the fault of those officers, so I thank them.
Although this planning reform legislation has been a long time in the making, the basic parameters were set long before it became a document for public consultation.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .