Page 2815 - Week 13 - Wednesday, 22 November 1989

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


environment but, in all its investigations, report also on its findings to the Minister responsible for development;

(c) comprise a core membership of five, two of whom will be nominees of relevant environmental and development groups while the remaining three will be appointed for their expertise and experience. The members will be suitably remunerated and the Minister will appoint, as necessary, additional expert members, with equal rights and responsibilities, for the duration of a specific investigation or assessment; and

(d) be empowered to report in such a manner and make such recommendations as it sees fit in terms of necessary modifications, relocations, prohibitions, or requirements for further study (such as inquiries, environmental impact statements, public environmental reports) and, where further study is required, the Minister responsible for development shall not permit the project to proceed until that study is complete; and

(3) pending the establishment of a permanent council, the Minister responsible for the environment appoint a Interim Environmental Council.

MR COLLAERY (10.54): I rise to support the comments of Mr Jensen on the motion of Mr Moore. When the motion was first introduced into the house by Mr Moore, the Rally decided it should not support it because the motion was against our Rally policy. Now, having heard the speech in support of the motion by our former Rally member, Mr Moore, the Rally is even more convinced that the motion is against Rally policy - and I might add that I have had a speech prepared for me on this topic. Rally policy on planning states at its start:

These policies are based on the main premise that planning decisions in the ACT should be made in open forum.

The Moore proposal is, essentially, that a development application is made; it is considered by the council; the council makes a decision to advise the Minister and then publicises its decision. This procedure, in our view, effectively stifles the public consultation process. It takes the effective decision making out of the public arena. It is a permanent fast-tracking process, a developer's dream, and it leads to the token planting of a "conservationist" onto this junta. Let us not call it the Moore motion. Let us call it what it is, the Whalan-Moore


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