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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2010 Week 05 Hansard (Wednesday, 5 May 2010) . . Page.. 1829 ..

will oppose, although we do not oppose all of them. I will just go through each part. The first part would change paragraph 2(b) to read “investigate formalising”. Given the issues with changing things in the territory plan, that is probably a reasonable change.

His second suggested change is to omit paragraphs 2(c)(ii) and (iii), and we do not agree with that. Paragraph 2(c)(ii) removes the mandatory minimum car parking requirements for new developments. We see this as a step towards affordable housing. Why should people be forced to pay for car parks they do not want to have? This is something where we could let the market choose. People will pay for a car park if they need one and not pay for one if they do not. I am really surprised that this is something that the Liberal Party, at least, have not supported.

I am very surprised that Mr Stanhope has problems with paragraph 2(c)(iii), because a sustainable transport contributions fund is already part of the territory plan. It has just never been implemented. It was also part of the draft—I am afraid it is still a draft—ACT government car parking strategy 2007. The government does, I believe, already support this, and I am just disappointed to find that Mr Stanhope no longer does.

The third amendment changes paragraph 2(d) to read “investigate improving” safe routes to school. I do not think we need to investigate it, but okay.

Paragraph 2(d)(i) refers to involving children in the planning process, and it is something I find very bizarre that neither the Liberal nor the Labor parties support this. The government has already signed on to child-friendly principles, of which this is one. I do not want to see us go back to the Victorian age where children should be seen and not heard.

On a more positive note, I thank both the Liberal and Labor parties very much for their contributions to this debate. I am very pleased that the motion will largely be supported. I am also very pleased about the government’s recent financial contribution towards active transport.

Amendments agreed to.

Motion, as amended, agreed to.


Motion (by Mr Stanhope) proposed:

That the Assembly do now adjourn.

Lyneham high school

MR DOSZPOT (Brindabella) (6:30): On 20 March this year I attended a council meeting of the ACT branch of the Australian Education Union at the invitation of Ms Penny Gilmour. I spoke to the council members on my role as shadow minister for education and my commitment to listen to the principals and teachers throughout all

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