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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2001 Week 7 Hansard (20 June) . . Page.. 2141 ..

MRS BURKE (10.55): I will be supporting Mr Rugendyke's motion. I think that his bill would be a deterrent for those people who, as Ms Tucker rightly said, become an extension of their vehicle when they get behind the wheel. The people in the suburbs would be very pleased with this bill, given that I have many people coming to me to express their concerns about the number of burnouts and donuts being done on median strips and gravel, causing great danger when the gravel spreads across the roads. I agree with the proposal and will be supporting it.

Mr Kaine: I rise to a point of order, Mr Speaker. Are we debating the question of the suspension of standing orders or are we debating the substance of the bill?

MR SPEAKER: I uphold the point of order.

Question put:

That Mr Rugendyke's motion be agreed to.

The Assembly voted-

	 Ayes 7  				Noes 8

 Mrs Burke  	Mr Smyth  		Mr Berry  	Mr Quinlan
 Mr Cornwell  	Mr Stefaniak  		Mr Corbell  	Mr Stanhope
 Mr Hird    				Mr Hargreaves  	Ms Tucker
 Mr Osborne     			Mr Kaine   
 Mr Rugendyke    			Mr Moore

Question so resolved in the negative.

Land (Planning and Environment) Amendment Bill 2001 (No 5)

Ms Tucker, pursuant to notice, presented the bill and its explanatory memorandum.

Title read by Clerk.

MS TUCKER (11.00): I move:

That this bill be agreed to in principle.

This bill is about restricting the minister's powers to call in development applications. This issue goes back to amendments to the land act at the end of 1996 when the government established the position of Commissioner for Land and Planning to have a statutory, independent decision maker on contentious development applications. However, the government did not want to give away too much of its power to influence development proposals. It retained call-in powers to enable the minister to call in for his decision what were termed at the time major proposals of territory-wide significance.

Since that time there has been growing concern in the community about the regular use of the powers by the current Minister for Urban Services to fast-track development applications that he favours and to avoid third party appeals. What were meant to be

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