Page 1490 - Week 05 - Wednesday, 7 May 2008
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
This is a very important project for the territory and, as I said last week, if we are serious about diversifying our economic base then we must take this project seriously; we must give it due consideration. That is why I particularly welcome the comment of the Deputy Leader of the Opposition this morning that the opposition is prepared to give this proposal full consideration, and I welcome that.
Dr Foskey’s motion calls for an EIS process and an independent report on its health impacts. It is worth noting that under the process that is established by law here in this Assembly these will occur if an assessment process under the PA finds that they are necessary. The thing here is that we should not pre-empt the outcomes by seeking to intervene inappropriately in this process. We have an independent statutory planning authority. We have noted in recent times some of the planning processes in other jurisdictions whereby the involvement of politicians in some of these processes has led to undesirable outcomes. I think we are served well in the ACT—
Mr Smyth: Too many Labor politicians.
MR BARR: I do not think it sits just with one party, Mr Smyth. But not to be distracted, I think we are served well by the independent statutory nature of ACTPLA and the fact that this process is divorced from the political process and that, I think, is important.
What I am concerned about in relation to Dr Foskey’s motion, though, is the relationship that she is seeking to draw between the proposals for the gas-fired power station and the associated business data centre. I presume she is referring to the eastern broadacre study that has been conducted by ACTPLA that she refers to, though, as ACTPLA’s industrial corridor.
I do not see much point in going into too much debate on that separate issue at this point, but again it needs to be made clear that it is not ACTPLA’s industrial corridor, nor, in fact, is it an industrial corridor. The work that is being undertaken by ACTPLA on behalf of the government is to analyse the appropriateness of the Majura-Symonston employment corridor identified by the Canberra spatial plan back in 2004.
The study is intended to identify opportunities, not only for industrial land but further areas of conservation value, service trades, institutional uses and possibly even residential uses. I note that the Leader of the Opposition was similarly oblivious to the content of the Canberra spatial plan that was published in 2004 at the time of his statements around this alleged industrial corridor. I took the opportunity to provide him with a copy of the Canberra spatial plan, and I will ask one of my staff to drop a copy to Dr Foskey’s office so that she can see the origins of this study.
It is worth noting that this work is still in its preliminary stages. It will be the subject of public consultation, as well as potentially any territory plan variations. So it strikes me again that what Dr Foskey wants is for the Assembly to become the ad hoc planning authority. A statutory planning authority that we have established by law that abides by the proper process appears to be inferior, in her view, to the Assembly
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .