Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .
Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2000 Week 2 Hansard (2 March) . . Page.. 533 ..
MS TUCKER (continuing):
or a priority allocation. Is it Housing policy to say that, even though they acknowledge that the person desperately needs a transfer or priority housing, because the person is paying off rental arrears? Do you understand the question now? Is that Housing policy?
MR SMYTH: Again, we work with the tenants as closely as we can to ensure that they do not get into trouble. As to whether it is a policy, I will seek advice from Housing.
MR CORBELL: Mr Speaker, my question is also to the Minister for Urban Services. Minister, draft variation No. 113 to the Territory Plan, relating to the Kingston foreshore project, contains certain special requirements with respect to building height, namely:
The overall height of buildings in the area is to be generally consistent with that of the tree canopy of mature trees in the area. This can be achieved through buildings being a maximum of four storeys except for some taller buildings or focal elements where these do not significantly impact on the landscape of the area ...
What building height does the Minister consider appropriate for the Kingston foreshore project, and why?
Ms Carnell: Mr Speaker, I take a point of order. Under standing order 117(e)(ii) a question may not refer to proceedings in committee not reported to the Assembly.
Mr Corbell: I wish to speak to the point of order, Mr Speaker. The question does not refer to the proceedings of a committee; it refers to a document released by the Government in relation to a draft variation to the Territory Plan. I have not in any way referred to the proceedings of the Planning and Urban Services Committee. It relates specifically to a document released by the Minister and the variation to the Territory Plan.
MR SPEAKER: Where is the document?
MR SMYTH: It is with the Planning and Urban Services Committee. The variation is before the Planning and Urban Services Committee for consideration and public consultation at this time. Mr Speaker, this is simply a fishing expedition on behalf of Mr Corbell, who last week lashed out by releasing some submissions that have been given to the committee and making demands that the Government put its position on the table.
Mr Stanhope: That sounds reasonable.
MR SMYTH: What is unreasonable here is that Mr Corbell hears something in committee that he does not like - in this case they have not even heard evidence; the submissions have simply been given in and the public hearings, I believe, are to be held tomorrow - and Mr Corbell, Mr Process from the Labor Party, lashes out and abuses the committee process by demanding answers to questions on the things that he does not like.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .