Page 2378 - Week 07 - Tuesday, 30 July 2019
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
Admin and procedure has found that there is nothing to prevent a member moving or the Assembly debating such a motion whilst a committee inquiry is underway. Unless we actually resolve the adjournment motion that was used by Mr Rattenbury, the opposition is prohibited from bringing forward this motion for debate until the planning and urban renewal committee has reported. As a very minimum, I would seek that the standing orders be suspended just to re-adjourn this motion in a straightforward manner that allows this to be brought forward on another date. As I say, the opposition stands here ready to deal with this matter today.
The use of development applications and the processing time the planning minister is overseeing have only got worse since April. We have seen the processing time for development applications six months ago taking about 60 days and now we are up to over 90 days.
Mr Barr: On a point of order, I think Mr Wall may have strayed from the reason for the suspension. That is what we are debating, the suspension of standing orders, not the motion itself.
MADAM SPEAKER: I will let Mr Wall continue, but I will be alert to his straying.
MR WALL: Thank you, Madam Speaker. I think it is important that the Assembly consider also the subject matter of Mr Parton’s motion and the impact that it has on the ACT community, particularly our economy. There are a number of builders and people in the industry who are waiting exorbitant amounts of time to have their applications processed. They are taking too long, and it is placing uncertainty on jobs. We have got very clear messages from those opposite of what they think about whether or not people need to be employed, and it seems that there is a blatant disregard for people who are employed in the private sector.
We are hearing time and again from builders who are experiencing these delays and who are now having to face the prospect of finding projects outside the ACT or letting staff go simply because this government and this minister cannot get their act together. That is why it is important that standing orders be suspended and that this motion be brought on.
MR BARR (Kurrajong—Chief Minister, Treasurer, Minister for Social Inclusion and Equality, Minister for Tertiary Education, Minister for Tourism and Special Events and Minister for Trade, Industry and Investment) (11.20): The government is happy to support a suspension to allow this to be adjourned again but it will not be brought on on an executive business day. It can be brought on according to the opposition’s scheduled timings for a future private members’ business day. If they wish to bring that on as a matter of urgency in August, if they wish to do that as part of their allocated business on private members’ business day, the government has no objection. But we will not allow the precedent of the opposition seeking to suspend standing orders to bring on private members’ business on an executive business day.
Given that this chamber devotes more time to private members’ business than any other parliament in this nation, there is ample time for the opposition to bring it on.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video