Page 2124 - Week 07 - Thursday, 20 August 2020

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


MR GENTLEMAN (Brindabella—Manager of Government Business, Minister for Advanced Technology and Space Industries, Minister for the Environment and Heritage, Minister for Planning and Land Management, Minister for Police and Emergency Services and Minister for Urban Renewal) (5.00): Provisions in the Territory Plan process already allow for appropriate oversight from the Assembly of the TPV process. These clauses would lead to increased uncertainty for industry and the community as to what the applicable law is at any given time and that is not supported by the government.

MR PARTON (Brindabella) (5.00): The Canberra Liberals cannot support clause 6. Notwithstanding the example that Ms Le Couteur brought up from earlier on in the term regarding a specific draft variation inquiry, we have consulted widely—including, of course, in the directorate—and we think that if clause 6 were instituted it would lead to confusion about the period of interim effect and that it would still be in effect until it was disallowed.

This is another one of the clauses of this bill that replicates provisions that, as the minister alluded to, are already in place. It is my belief that the draft variation process already allows for appropriate oversight from the Assembly on this process. When you consider the level of complexity of our planning system at present, the Canberra Liberals’ view is that this would lead to even more uncertainty as to what the applicable law is at any given time. So clause 6 will not have the Canberra Liberals’ support.

Clause 6 negatived.

Clause 7.

MS LE COUTEUR (Murrumbidgee) (5.02): I will speak on this and the next clause. They are consequential to clause 6, so I suggest that those people who foolishly voted against clause 6 should continue voting no.

Clause 7 negatived.

Clause 8 negatived.

Clause 9.

MS LE COUTEUR (Murrumbidgee) (5.03): This is another consequential clause, so I suggest that members vote the same on this as they intend to vote for clause 10.

Clause 9 negatived.

Clause 10.

MS LE COUTEUR (Murrumbidgee) (5.03): I should probably just stay standing! This clause has the same effect as clause 6, which we have already voted on, but it is a different stage in the draft plan variation process. This is the interim effect of a draft


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