Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .
Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2002 Week 7 Hansard (4 June) . . Page.. 1830 ..
MR CORBELL (continuing):
perhaps I should say, without a system-wreck the amenity of those suburbs. I am very pleased with the level of response to date.
Other organisations and individuals have contacted my office to express support for the intention of the variation. Most of the comments I have received support the principles of the variation, which protect the urban amenity of our city, and promote development around centres in a focused way to achieve and implement our sustainability objectives. I am also grateful for the comments from other Assembly members, in particular Ms Tucker, who has indicated generous support for the variation to date.
Mr Speaker, PALM has established a help line for people who are seeking further information about the variation. Most of the inquiries received have been about the government's proposals in relation to dual occupancy development.
There has, of course, been a range of comment from industry associations, including the HIA and the MBA. They have raised a number of concerns about the details of the draft variation, and I welcome their comments, because this government is releasing this draft variation for a very thorough community consultation process. Unlike most other draft variations, most of this one does not take interim effect for a period of two months from the date of its release, last Thursday. This leaves a significant period of time in which to address procedural fairness issues for people who already have applications in the pipeline, and it also allows for a good range of comment to be received before any of the proposals take effect.
I look forward to receiving those comments. I look forward to working with everyone interested in this very important variation, as we seek to implement its provisions and respond to concerns that are raised along the way.
MS GALLAGHER: Can the minister explain the government's response to concerns expressed by some industry groups that there should have been consultation prior to the release of the draft variation?
MR CORBELL: I thank Ms Gallagher for the question. This is an important point. I think it is worth reminding members that there has already been extremely extensive consultation about proposed new residential land use policies. There will be much more consultation as we work through the release of the draft variation document itself.
I think it is important to remind members that draft variation No 200 was prepared in response to the previous government's proposed residential land use policies and ACTCode 2. Those two proposals of the previous Liberal government were a matter of such serious public concern that the Assembly required the government to withdraw that draft variation, and undertake another three months of community consultation on those draft variations.
Mr Smyth: That was politics. Let's fess up here.
MR CORBELL
: I see that it obviously still hurts the former minister for planning. It is as a result of that consultation process that the new government has introduced draft variation No 200. A report on those discussions was tabled by the previous minister, Mr Smyth, on 30 August last year. In this document you can see the range of concerns
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .