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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2010 Week 13 Hansard (Wednesday, 17 November 2010) . . Page.. 5571 ..

I submit that these changes are more than technical variations and should go through the processes of part 5.3 of the act before proceeding.

However, this motion calls upon the government and gives the government an opportunity to get their act together and put their case forward. If indeed this is a technical variation and they can make that case based on the relevant sections of the act, it should be put it forward and it should be put forward in detail.

I call on the government in the motion to provide to the Assembly by close of business on Thursday, 18 November a detailed justification for classifying these amendments technical amendments, including any legal advice received and any advice provided by ACTPLA. Only in this way can we be sure substantive changes have not been introduced under the guise of a technical amendment. From a commonsense level, on a legal level, at a planning level and a government level that does not appear to be the case. It is clear why a government planning to add 600 new homes in suburbs already being built would not want scrutiny.

The question for us as an Assembly is: is this reasonable? I commend this motion to the Assembly and I urge members to support this call on the government, for the good of the territory and the people of Gungahlin.

MR BARR (Molonglo—Minister for Education and Training, Minister for Planning, Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation and Minister for Gaming and Racing) (4.20): There are several aspects of this motion that clearly need to be addressed this afternoon. The first is that the motion itself is predicated on an incorrect understanding of the legislation that underpins technical amendments. Technical amendments are a type of amendment to the territory plan. The Planning and Development Act describes the different circumstances where technical amendments can be used. Section 87 of the act describes the circumstances in which they can be made and in the interests of clarity for members I will detail those now.

A variation that (a) would not adversely affect anyone’s rights if approved and (b) has as its only object the correction of a formal error in the plan is a technical amendment described as an error variation under section 87(a) of the act. A variation that (a) would only change a code and (b) is consistent with the policy purpose and policy framework of the code and (c) is not an error variation is a technical amendment described as a code variation under section 87(b) of the act.

A variation to rezone land in a future urban area, provided the rezoning would not be inconsistent with the structure plan for the area, is a technical amendment under sections 87(c) and 95 of the act. A variation made following approval of an estate development plan for land in a future urban area that (a) identifies the zones that will apply to the land, consistent with the estate development plan, and (b) incorporates any other element of the estate development plan that the estate development plan indicates should be ongoing is a technical amendment under sections 87(c) and 96 of the act.

A variation to change the boundary of a zone or overlay if the change is consistent with (a) the apparent intent of the original boundary line and (b) the objective for the

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