Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Sittings . . . . PDF . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2005 Week 09 Hansard (Thursday, 18 August 2005 2005) . . Page.. 2879 ..


A range of mechanisms can be used through smart landscaping to reduce water use, even on large blocks. We understand those principles. We understand that it can be done. There are excellent examples of dry land landscapes that are visually and aesthetically pleasing, that can maintain the garden city character of some of these older subdivisions without simply saying that the only solution is to allow the people to sink a bore. That is a nonsense argument. If the Liberal opposition really believes that the only way to maintain the garden city character is to sink a bore for large blocks—

Mrs Dunne: You should have come into the debate earlier, Simon, you would have understood—

MR CORBELL: I was listening to it upstairs, Mrs Dunne. I was listening to you very closely. The Liberal Party’s arguments on this issue simply do not make sense. There is a range of mechanisms available to ensure that gardens remain visually and aesthetically pleasing but also are much more efficient in the use of water and which will avoid the need for simply saying that the solution is to sink a bore. This is a prudent, balanced and conservative, and rightly conservative, approach when it comes to the use of a ground water resource, because the ground water resource is limited. For that reason, I think the arguments on planning grounds are not strong from the Liberal opposition and this amendment should be supported.

Question put:

That Mr Stanhope’s amendment be agreed to.

The Assembly voted—

Ayes 7

Noes 4

Mr Corbell

Mr Hargreaves

Mrs Burke

Dr Foskey

Ms MacDonald

Mrs Dunne

Ms Gallagher

Ms Porter

Mr Mulcahy

Mr Gentleman

Mr Seselja

Question so resolved in the affirmative.

Amendment agreed to.

Clause 5, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 6.

MR CORBELL (Molonglo—Minister for Health and Minister for Planning) (11.46): The government will be opposing this clause. The proposal is to remove this clause from the bill. It is a privative clause to ensure that the provisions of the Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1999 do not apply to a decision of the minister in relation to the declaration of a moratorium. This clause is no longer required, as the minister will no longer be empowered to declare a moratorium. The removal of this


Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Sittings . . . . PDF . . . .