Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2000 Week 9 Hansard (6 September) . . Page.. 2911 ..


MR CORBELL (continuing):

Asking members to put their arguments on the line in the Assembly today was one way of engaging and encouraging that debate. And it was one way of asking members to decide whether they were happy with planning in this city or not, and whether they were satisfied with the way planning worked in this city or not. A matter of public importance is all very well, but it is about time that we actually started having a substantial debate about policy and about planning in Canberra. That is why it warranted a motion.

Mr Deputy Speaker, I want to conclude with a couple of comments. The first is another quote from Gleeson and Low's book, Australian Urban Planning: New Challenges, New Agendas. This is a very good text and I certainly recommend it to all members who have an interest in planning. The quote is about openness and about engaging in democratic debate, and it says:

A plan is a collection of policies for a city, not made lightly and not to be changed on the whim of a minister or a developer. Planning means sticking to public policy in the face of development pressure. That needs to be clearly registered. It will be difficult, because the culture of planning in Australia is quite the reverse: the first sign of developer pressure often results in capitulation.

That happens too often in Canberra. The Territory Plan is changed far too often on the whim of individual development proponents. And every time we change the Territory Plan to suit the whim of an individual developer, we undermine strategic planning in our city, and we undermine the capacity of Canberrans to have faith in our system of planning.

In conclusion, the capacity for Canberrans to engage as equals in this process is not about equal standing or appeal rights. It is about whether or not everyone has an equal say in influencing planning policy; whether everyone has an equal say about what development occurs and where. The quote that I have just read underlines that fact, and demonstrates that, at the moment, planning is driven by development pressure, not by a genuine attempt to engage individual citizens in the future shape and form of their city. I urge members to support the motion.

Question put:

That the motion (Mr Corbell's ) be agreed to.

The Assembly voted-

 Ayes, 4  	Noes, 5

 Mr Corbell  	Mr Cornwell
 Mr Hargreaves  Mr Kaine
 Ms Tucker  	Mr Moore
 Mr Wood  	Mr Smyth
   		Mr Rugendyke

Question so resolved in the negative.

Sitting suspended from 12.15 to 2.30 pm


Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .