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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2001 Week 4 Hansard (28 March) . . Page.. 1090 ..

MS TUCKER (continuing):

into interim effect until the Assembly has considered the results of the public consultation.

Mr Kaine put it very well when he quite rightly expressed amazement at this process. Given the complexity of the document, I think it is a reasonable approach that we do have time and that it is not given interim effect at all because there is confusion about how the policies will be implemented in this interim period until the variation is finalised. Mr Corbell is also proposing that a community advisory panel be established to review the proposed policies. I am a bit concerned that this panel overlaps with the role of the LAPACs and that the LAPACs appear to have been sidelined in the process.

The LAPACs have their problems, but we should encourage them to contribute to this debate, if they want to, because they already have quite extensive experience in the assessment of redevelopment proposals in existing residential areas and in attempting to reconcile different opinions on what is appropriate development. This new advisory panel would, however, have to start from scratch. On the other hand, I am always open to trying out new public consultation processes so that we can find an effective process.

Mr Kaine: You could always try talking to each other.

MS TUCKER: You could try talking to them, Mr Kaine. It certainly could not be worse than the current superficial approach of this government, where consultation seems to be more about trying to justify decisions already made, rather than being a genuine attempt to come up with a broadly agreed approach to a particular issue.

I am therefore prepared to support the establishment of this community advisory panel in this instance as a trial. I would just make the point, though, that I do not think that this proposed community advisory panel should be the only channel of public consultation which could be applied from this motion. I am therefore putting up an amendment to Mr Corbell's motion to make clear that the government must respond not just to the reports of the community advisory panel but also to comments received from the general public and from the LAPACs. I move:

Paragraph (e), after "report" insert "and other comments received from the Local Area Planning Advisory Committees and the public on the proposed policies and code".

MR SPEAKER: Before I call the minister, it would be remiss of me not to acknowledge for the sake of Hansard that Mr Wayne Berry, our third Temporary Deputy Speaker, occupied the chair shortly before I resumed it.

Mr Osborne: Mr Speaker, I would like to add that I think he did a fine job, too. He did not say a word. There is probably a role for him there.


(Minister for Urban Services, Minister for Business, Tourism and the Arts and Minister for Police and Emergency Services) (8.44): Once again, Labor has got it wrong. Mr Corbell has added to the litany of mistakes he has made and misinformation he has put out about planning in the ACT with some of the words that he used tonight. Let us go back into the record. For instance, Mr Corbell said that the current government was responsible for the 5 per cent rule of thumb whereas, in fact, it was his government

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