Page 672 - Week 02 - Thursday, 6 March 2008
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
provisions that just saw ad hoc redevelopment occurring throughout the suburbs. In fact, we now have a much more controlled basis for residential intensification that is achieving important policy outcomes for the territory in a range of areas. The government completely rejects Mrs Dunne’s analysis.
We look forward as part of the new territory plan to delivering on some key outcomes for the people of Gungahlin. That is a very high priority for me. Since I have been planning minister I have indicated that the needs of the people of Gungahlin are front and centre for me not only as the planning minister but also as education and sport and recreation minister. I will continue through those ministerial roles to work hard to deliver the services that the people of Gungahlin need. That is a very clear commitment from me. That commitment can be seen in the new Harrison school, the funding for the Gungahlin college and the range of associated planning works that are underway and were funded in the second appropriation.
This government remain committed to reform in the planning portfolio, along with all other areas of government. We will continue to deliver services efficiently and effectively. This is another example of that. I thank members for their support of the new territory plan.
Question resolved in the affirmative.
Planning and Development Legislation Amendment Bill 2008
Debate resumed from 14 February 2008, on motion by Mr Barr:
That this bill be agreed to in principle.
MR SESELJA (Molonglo—Leader of the Opposition) (6.14): The minister will be relieved, after our last planning debate, to know that there will be no amendments today. I think in the last one there were some 100 or so that I moved, but I think we have staked our policy differences when it comes to the planning and development legislation.
The planning system reform package has been a complex and a detailed issue. The opposition, as stated earlier in my speech on the territory plan, has supported the process and sought to work productively with the government, industry, stakeholders and the broader community. The substance of the bill as presented to the Assembly deals largely with the implementation of the government’s reactive measures to the housing affordability crisis and goes also to key compliance issues requiring resolution.
One of the key changes to government policy contained in the bill is the move to allow for over-the-counter land sales. A major criticism of the government from the opposition and indeed the community at large has been the inability of the government to provide land to the community in a timely and affordable fashion. The fact that the law needed to be changed to allow the government to move forward in this area reflects the very real breakdown and failure of policy.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .