Page 2016 - Week 06 - Wednesday, 6 May 2009
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
which always have an element of ambiguity in them. They are not a clear hard and fast rule. There is always an element of ambiguity and possibly in these cases no real ability for ACTPLA or even ACAT to make decisions against a development.
Certainly, we believe that if there is in fact a proposal to change the Giralang local centre to a group centre there should be community consultation specifically around this proposal. For a major change at this level it needs to be the views of the whole Belconnen community, not just the Giralang residents, because the whole community would be affected.
In the motion today I have called upon the government to limit the floor sizes of supermarkets in local areas to a gross floor area of 600 square metres under the local centres precinct code CZ4 of the territory plan. Subsequently, I have come to understand that this amount may not be appropriate for a number of reasons, and I understand that an amendment will shortly be moved to remove that.
The particular sizing came from an ACTPLA decision relating to a previous proposal for the Giralang shops redevelopment. In it ACTPLA advised:
It is considered that a commercial space of around 500sqm to 700sqm with an appropriate design can allow for a greater commercial mix, including a small supermarket and/or a reasonably-sized restaurant with the appropriate service function which would be desirable for the Giralang local centre.
If that is the case it should be clear that this is ACTPLA policy. However, while it is not policy it means that inappropriate development applications can continue to be lodged until the matter has been clarified in the territory plan. What I think is needed at this stage is for the government to start a process to develop more detailed guidelines on floor size restrictions to be incorporated into the territory plan codes. This process would presumably be a draft variation to the territory plan and would involve Canberra-wide community and industry consultation.
We know that there is already a long list of policy issues that various people in the community—developers and residents—are trying to clarify through ACAT and, if they have sufficient funds, through the courts. We know that people who take an issue to the courts usually have either more money or a lot to gain, which means that once we get to the stage where policy is determined in the courts, we end up with policy that is skewed towards those with the deepest pockets who can afford the best lawyers.
Instead, what we really want and need to see in this instance is policy determined by the Assembly and the planning authority—the people who have the least to gain and the most policy knowledge. By being transparent and up-front, this would save the government money in terms of spending time in the courts clarifying the matter. We believe that the government has a vital role to play in intervening in the market where necessary. When the government fails to have policies which protect the interests of local residents and small and local businesses, they are also failing the local communities.
In this motion today I call on the government to release its updated supermarket policy, which I believe and hope will take into account the Australian Competition
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .