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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2002 Week 14 Hansard (12 December) . . Page.. 4471 ..


MS DUNDAS (continuing):

Public land development corresponds with the Democrats' position of focusing on the triple bottom line. Land development must look at the social needs, such as affordable housing and access, and environmental concerns, such as water usage, over and above the need to make big profits. We also recognise that good land development often needs a high initial capital investment in order to reduce the ongoing maintenance cost to the territory in the future. This is another good reason for public land development, as a public developer should not only be looking at the private profits from the initial development, but also at the ongoing cost to the public purse in the future.

When we were discussing this chapter in the round-table meetings that have been discussed, I put forward a number of amendments that were not necessarily taken up by the government. However, the land agency continues to be bound by the objectives of this act, which is to:

provide a planning and land system that contributes to the orderly and sustainable development of the ACT-

consistently with the social, environmental and economic aspirations of the people of the ACT; and

in accordance with sound financial principles.

I was happy to take that on board and not necessarily engage in protracted debate about whether this land agency will achieve the aims of social, economic and environmental outcomes. At this stage, I am willing to accept that the objectives give enough direction to the land agency so that it can provide and achieve quality outcomes for the ACT community in planning and land development in the ACT.

Question put:

That clauses 37 to 72, as amended, be agreed to.

The Assembly voted-


 	Ayes, 11  		Noes, 6

 Mr Berry  	Ms MacDonald  	Mr Cornwell
 Mr Corbell  	Mr Quinlan  	Mrs Dunne
 Mrs Cross  	Mr Stanhope  	Mr Humphries
 Ms Dundas  	Ms Tucker  	Mr Pratt
 Ms Gallagher  	Mr Wood  	Mr Smyth
 Mr Hargreaves    		Mr Stefaniak
Question so resolved in the affirmative.

Clauses 37 to 72, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 73 agreed to.


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