Page 2272 - Week 06 - Friday, 27 June 2008
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Corruption, and I hear there is more on that front to come closer to our town. I certainly believe that is something we should be resisting.
There are processes in place, and once you go down the road of having political determination in every developmental project you will reach a situation, as frequently now occurs in my original home state of Tasmania, where every time somebody puts up the slightest idea for a new development, there is a hue and cry and a minister is pushed into a corner and backs down. People then pack up and move on, to the point where industry in that state is now largely a branch office affair.
If we are ever going to diversify this economy, heaven help Canberra if, every time someone wants to develop something, there is this yell that it should be stopped; it is interfering with someone’s space. I would not like a power station on my back doorstep. I acknowledge that, and I have said that openly. I also openly tell people here where I live, but I think the fact of life is—
Mrs Burke: Yes.
MR MULCAHY: Mrs Burke waves in a rather patronising tone, but the fact of the matter is that this was concealed. It was revealed by the media and it was a significant issue. I think that if one is in a situation where they have a very personal interest in a matter before this place, it is incumbent on them to clear any doubt in terms of the position they occupy.
Nevertheless, the fundamental issue here is: do you believe that government ought to step in and start reacting each time there is a political hue and cry on a development? If that is the system we are going to have, then there are significant downsides and we could go down the road to where the previous Liberal government found itself over some of these matters with some of the consequences that had for former members of that government and officials. But we will leave that for another occasion.
I did raise in estimates the issue of staff shortages in ACTPLA. I asked Mr Barr, and Mr Savery responded, about the number of vacant jobs. At that point, he said between 15 and 20 out of a workforce of 250—not quite 10 per cent, but getting towards it—of his workforce, and that is troubling. That may be an issue related to the nationwide problem of shortage of planners—I know there are enormous opportunities now for planners in the private sector—or because we are not competitive with the commonwealth. I am not too sure. But the end effect of that is that it must impact on the efficiencies of ACTPLA.
I think I heard a comment earlier on, but there is an inconsistency, I think, in bringing in greater penalties in terms of people developing blocks but at the same time frustrating them with the development application process. They cannot win on both fronts if they cannot get a DA through in a reasonable time frame. I have not heard any great cries of satisfaction about the new system. Mr Seselja said a number of people had raised matters with him and expressed frustration. I have heard the same sentiment from developers at events in recent weeks. They continue to tell me that life goes on in this frustrating fashion. All manner of them can quote me stories of difficulties with development applications.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .