Page 1021 - Week 04 - Tuesday, 24 March 2015
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
“commercially exploit or develop” university property. It also includes provisions to give the university the power to enter into contracts for the purpose of commercially exploiting or developing property.
What does it mean to “exploit” university property? I think the government has unintentionally revealed its intentions in this provision. The bill is not really about helping UC remain competitive or securing its future. It is about exploiting the property for the government’s benefit. This bill is about bypassing the proper planning processes yet again—the very processes which all other builders and developers must comply with.
The government has informed the opposition that it intends to bring a further bill to allow for unit titling on University of Canberra property. It also intends to bring a territory plan variation. The government has not been up-front about what will be included in the subsequent bill and the territory plan variation. In fact, when Mr Smyth and I asked questions, we were told that the future plans for the site were not really relevant to this bill. Unfortunately for the opposition, we have grave doubts. Information about the intended use of the site is vital to consideration for this bill.
Traditionally, university land has been seen as a community resource, not property to be exploited by the government. If the intended use of the land is to be changed, the community will want to know what it is going to be used for. It is not enough to say that the university has a five-year master plan. We all know that plans change. The government have become expert at changing plans and not delivering upon what they have said. Before members can decide to give all the power included in this bill to the university, we should know what the power will be used for.
The government has informed the opposition that the provisions of the next bill and the territory plan variation have not yet been finalised. If this is the case, the government should delay the planning aspects of this bill until the details of the bill and variation have been decided. Why are the government so keen to make these planning changes before the details are made public? What are they trying to hide, Madam Speaker?
Once again, we have a situation where the government is being tricky with planning. For whatever reason, they do not like the current planning processes so they have decided to bypass them. The government have been unable to provide any details or assurances about the application of planning provisions and the normal rates and charges associated with developments elsewhere in the ACT. Or maybe I should say that they have been unwilling. Any questions the opposition has asked about the potential future development have not been answered because the government say they are irrelevant and the plans have not been decided. This is not true. The government have not worked out the details because either there are no details to work out or they simply do not want to tell the community.
The government is potentially going to give UC the power to do whatever it wants. I think we will find that some of those difficult questions that the opposition has asked will be answered very simply when the details come out. It is just a shame they are not coming out now, Madam Speaker. Things like the lease variation charge and rates
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video