Page 1550 - Week 05 - Wednesday, 10 May 2017

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video

---

It goes on to say that community objection to the use of community facility land for the public housing renewal program is likely, that it is anticipated that there will be strong opinion regarding the loss of a quantity of unleased territory land designated for community use and that a proactive and strategic communication and engagement plan will be required for these sites. I think that is exactly what we have all been saying this morning. It has not happened, despite the fact that it was flagged a year and a half ago by the directorate as being required. Instead, it has been done very quietly and with no consultation whatsoever.

This is what the amendment to the amendment to my motion is trying to achieve: that there is proper scrutiny, there is proper accountability, there is proper transparency and there is the opportunity for members of the community to understand what is going on with regard to this community facility zoned land.

That is why, despite the fact that Mr Gentleman’s amendment brings in quite a bit of discussion about public housing, which was not the intent of my original motion, with the addition of Mr Hanson’s amendment referring it to committee, we are prepared to support the amendment to Mr Gentleman’s amendment, because we do all support public housing; we do need to support vulnerable people in our community, because they are our people and we are those people. We are not against public housing. What we want to do is make sure that the community is involved in these decisions and have the opportunity to have their say, not feel like they have been shunted aside and their views ignored. It is not about public housing.

We would be having this discussion if there were a proposal to build a defence installation on community facility zoned land, a hazardous waste facility on community facility zoned land, a liquid fuel depot on community facility zoned land or, indeed, on residential zoned land.

I will go back to what I started with this morning. We have zoning laws for a reason. Let us use them as they are intended to be used. For that reason, I support Mr Hanson’s amendment to Mr Gentleman’s amendment to our motion.

Question put:

That Mr Hanson’s amendment to Mr Gentleman’s proposed amendment be agreed to.

The Assembly voted—

---

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video