Page 4717 - Week 15 - Wednesday, 7 December 1994
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
We also recommended the setting up of a panel of government, industry and community representatives to urgently simplify and rationalise the consultation processes used by DELP and the Planning Authority. We think the joint approach would be a good one. We also recommended establishing a single and comprehensive consultation and approval process for a development project, including the lease variation process. One stop. We recommended combining the approvals process for building applications and design and siting applications. Again, that is a one-stop approach so that people understand fully the process. We recommended legislating to make guidelines affecting the Territory Plan disallowable instruments in the Assembly so that any member can move that they be disallowed, thus increasing the opportunity for public debate and knowledge of the guidelines. Another recommendation is that we broaden the definition of environment and make other improvements to sections of the legislation dealing with environmental matters. We also recommended defining more clearly the powers of the Land and Planning Appeals Board.
Madam Speaker, underlying the committee's recommendations is a concern that the Canberra community receive a top class level of service from planners and officials in the Department of the Environment, Land and Planning. Perhaps if any one recommendation reflected this concern to a tee it is that recommendation urging the Department of the Environment, Land and Planning and the Planning Authority to institute suitable processes and facilities such that any person inquiring about the nature of planning legislation pertaining to a particular parcel of land can find this information quickly and accurately. The committee considers that this is the bottom line - namely, that our citizens are entitled to quick and accurate information from planners and Department of the Environment, Land and Planning officials about matters affecting land in the ACT. In my view, much of the concern raised in the committee was about access to information, and access to timely and accurate information. It is obvious that some people in our community do not believe that this is the standard of service that they are getting. If you have a look at all of the submissions that were made and all of the concerns that were expressed throughout the committee's inquiry, it becomes very clear that there is a perceived inadequacy out there in the community. The committee felt obliged to ensure that, as far as it could, its recommendations contained proposals which would lead to a better outcome for the community.
I consider that this important report of the committee, together with the Government's decisions about the recommendations contained in the Lansdown report on residential development, will address community concern about planning issues, and I am confident that it will improve public confidence in the planning process. I think that was a most important commitment from all of the members of the committee. I found it a good committee to work with. There was a level of understanding about the concern out there in the community which led to a list of recommendations which, in my view, should result in a better outcome for the community. Despite recent events in this place, I think it will also improve the impression that the community has of this place because they will be able to see that there is a process whereby they can get access to their politicians, either full time or part time, and they will be able to make submissions to them in relation to a whole range of matters and get an outcome. I think they have had a quality outcome.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .