Page 1974 - Week 06 - Wednesday, 7 June 2017
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
supply of this land, particularly in the new suburbs, which often have much less of this type of land than older ones. That land supply is, of course, a long-term community asset, and it needs to cater for community issues such as community halls, places of worship, schools and so on for years to come.
Importantly, we should all reflect that in fact not all community zoned land, possibly without a Territory Plan amendment, could be used for public or supportive housing. I think it was a 2011 amendment—someone can correct me if I am wrong—for which, for a number of community facilities zoned sites, there was an overlay saying “not for housing”. I am afraid I did not have time to research the long history of amendments and see exactly which one that was, but there is quite a lot of community facilities zoned land which specifically has been excluded from any possibility of housing. It is important that the community realises this. It is in no way open slather, and this issue has been thought about. Whether it has been thought about adequately is, of course, a debatable question, but it has been thought about. This is clearly a real issue. We want more public housing, we want more community facilities, and we have a limited land supply. How we balance that is a difficult question.
I, or more precisely my office, have had considerable discussions with Ms Berry’s office about this motion, and I am pleased that Ms Berry’s amendment calls on the government to continue to commit to pre-DA consultation for all public housing development proposals on community facility zoned land. This addresses some of the community’s concerns about being properly consulted before the government decides to develop public housing on community facilities zoned land.
We need to have an open and transparent debate in which the government explains to the whole Canberra community how important public housing renewal is. We should be openly discussing the challenges of finding enough land and the community should be invited to help find a solution, while ensuring there is the right balance between providing public housing for those in need and protecting the land needed for community buildings, parks and shared public spaces. This should not be a debate just for the people of Weston Creek. It should be a debate for all of the people of Canberra.
What has happened in Canberra over the years is that we have had a steadily decreasing proportion of public housing. I understand it is down to six per cent now. When the Liberals were last in power here, they sold off around 3,000 public housing dwellings, and we have not managed to increase our numbers since then. It was not that long ago, within living memory, when we were at around 30 per cent public housing in Canberra. We need to have a community debate about what is appropriate, what, as a community, we would like to do to support the vulnerable members of our community. It should not be a debate just for Weston Creek or the people who are living next to potential new community housing developments. It should be a debate for the whole community.
The Greens obviously support good community consultation. On this issue, it has been particularly hard, because as well as the issues that some people have with public housing, there has been the issue whereby communities have lived next to a block of land which has been vacant basically for as long as the suburb has been there. To find
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video