Page 3062 - Week 11 - Tuesday, 11 September 1990
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Program Information and Estimates 1990-91 (Budget paper No. 5).
Statement on ACT Schools re-shaping program 1990-91 (Supplementary budget information paper No. 3).
Summary of Financial Information 1990-91 (Budget paper No. 4).
Women's Budget Statement 1990-91 (Supplementary budget information paper No. 1).
Debate (on motion by Ms Follett) adjourned.
PLANNING, DEVELOPMENT AND INFRASTRUCTURE - STANDING COMMITTEE
Alteration of Reporting Date
Motion (by Mr Jensen), by leave, proposed:
That paragraph (2) of the terms of reference of the Standing Committee on Planning, Development and Infrastructure's inquiry into alterations to current policy concerning fences on suburban/residential building blocks be amended by omitting "11 September 1990" and substituting "16 October 1990".
MR BERRY (3.55): One of the intriguing aspects about this motion by my colleague across the way is that it seems that the committee is not able to come to agreement on the matter. I will not speak for long on the matter, but I think it might be well for the Assembly to consider passing over the matter altogether because there are, of course, adequate guidelines in relation to fences in the ACT which most ACT residents are prepared to live with. If the committee members are not able to agree on the issue it might be well for the community if they could turn their attention to other matters.
MR WOOD (3.56): I would support my colleague on this. This reference, as I recall, was given to the committee by the Follett Government - it must have been half way through last year; July last year. It was in the time of the Follett Government, but I would think, by now, if the committee which has been operating under Mr Jensen since November or December has not been able to get on to it, we should be giving it up.
I recall also that recently we had an inquiry into the billboard on City Hill. I noted a comment in the paper that that seemed a bit unnecessary, and I would certainly agree with that. I believe, Mr Jensen, that you and your committee ought to be getting down to the task of looking at our proposed planning legislation. I have heard you say from time to time here that that is important. I would think you should get on to that - it does have high priority - and let us see whether we can get something done
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .