Page 3274 - Week 09 - Wednesday, 21 August 2019
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
I will leave it there. We will go to the vote on Mr Wall’s amendment and then come back to mine.
MS LE COUTEUR (Murrumbidgee) (3.19): I think this is the point at which I have to talk, given that I am basically going to be talking about Mr Parton’s motion and Mr Wall’s amendment. I thought I would be talking after the ALP amendment had been moved but I think that timing is wrong. What we have got here is not really necessary, as Mr Gentleman has said. Most of this information is already available on the website.
The other thing is that it is only looking at one part of the world: efficiency. I am not anti efficiency. Efficiency is very important. But you do not want to efficiently do the wrong thing. I think we need to ensure that what we are actually doing is improving, disapproving, modifying or whatever, DAs correctly. That is equally important.
The amendment seems to assume that the issue is probably one of staffing or efficiency but it is not at all clear that it actually is. Part of it, I think, might be due to the fact that DAs are getting an awful lot more complicated. If you compare the DA for the Republic, for instance, with a DA for a simple single dwelling, the DA for the Republic is going to take an awful lot longer than a DA for a simple dwelling or house extension.
We do not want to see DA staff being pressured to do things more quickly at the expense of quality. I know very much that neighbours do not want to see that. I am sure all of us have had emails and representations from people who believe that the DA for the thing next to them is not legal under ACTPLA’s rules. ACTPLA may or may not agree with that but it is very important that these things, even the smaller developments, are well looked at for safety, if nothing else, and good neighbourly relations. We have rules for a reason and enforcing them is important. Enforcing them quickly is also important.
I do not support Mr Wall’s amendment and I flag that I will be supporting the ALP amendment when it is moved.
MR PARTON (Brindabella) (3.22): When it comes to problems in the planning system it really is a case of where we start, is it not? It is a case of where we start. In recent days we have had the long-running building quality saga thrust into the limelight courtesy of Four Corners, and Canberra has found itself in the spotlight. It shone very brightly on us and it is not the sort of spotlight that we really wanted directed our way. But it is no great surprise.
Today’s motion brings to the Assembly a matter which is brought up with me by constituents at least three times a week. Our development application system is a shambles. I am fully supportive of Mr Wall’s amendment because I think it enables us to have a closer look at exactly what is going on.
It is no surprise that when this motion first came before the chamber the government and their bodyguards, the Greens, did whatever they could to stop us debating it. They
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video