Page 3990 - Week 11 - Tuesday, 15 Sept 2009
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
residential, commercial and industrial sectors. In fact, in the 2008-09 year, land to accommodate 4,339 dwelling sites was released. This bettered the target of 4,208 and was a significant increase over the previous record of 3,470 sites delivered in 2007-08.
The releases and developments undertaken by the LDA also reflect a dedication to achieving new standards of innovation, excellence and value in urban design and sustainable development in Canberra. The LDA contributes positively to the building of thriving and vibrant communities by facilitating high-quality design and built-form outcomes in its urban renewal projects and the development of greenfield commercial and industrial land. That achievement, despite the uncertainty of the prevailing economic conditions, comes from having the right structures in place.
The management of territory-owned corporations and territory authorities is not a simple set-and-forget exercise for government. We take our responsibilities and accountabilities seriously. We do not take the decision to vest the decision-making powers and the day-to-day management of commercial activities lightly. We do appoint experienced, well-credentialed and professional boards, who then in turn recruit similarly qualified chief executives. We look to these people for leadership, accountability, judgement and the highest standards of performance.
As I mentioned earlier, I think this subject matter, the management of statutory authorities, indeed reflects the misunderstanding demonstrated by those opposite. And I remind the Assembly that all governments across all jurisdictions have made decisions to facilitate significant government commercial functions being established as companies such as territory-owned corporations. I think what we have said and have seen is that the model has worked well during the past 20 years and I thank you, Madam Assistant Speaker, for the opportunity to talk on this issue.
MR RATTENBURY (Molonglo) (4.03): I would like to thank Mr Doszpot for bringing on this matter of public importance today, because it is an issue of debate at the moment. It is certainly one I have been giving some thought to in recent times. From my perspective, there are two key issues of prominence that concern me at the moment with regard to territory authorities and territory-owned corporations. Although I am unclear whether today’s debate is revealing any consistent themes, I certainly think a bunch of issues are attached to this.
I would like to start with EPIC, or Exhibition Park, which falls into the category of being a territory authority. There has been some significant politic discussion around the issue of whether Exhibition Park should continue as a territory authority or whether it should be moved back into government. I think there are positives about EPIC existing as a territory authority
EPIC was established many, many years ago now—in fact, before ACT self-government was established. There is no question that EPIC is a valuable community facility. If you look back through the history of it, the board has brought a range of skills, energy, expertise and commitment to their work in ensuring EPIC is a successful venue. When a venue such as EPIC has a board and is managed somewhat independently of government, it can lead to a difference in strategic direction from what the government and its departments would implement. I do not know that that is always such a bad thing. I think it leads to greater diversity of outcomes for us as a
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .