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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2003 Week 8 Hansard (19 August) . . Page.. 2743 ..

MRS DUNNE (continuing):

ensuring that elderly people stay in the suburbs as long as possible. But draft variation 200 means that the people in Chapman cannot do it. Before the fires and before draft variation 200 happened, they could. (Extension of time granted.)

Another constituent from Duffy who had his house burnt down by the fire went to rebuild his house. His house does not conform exactly with the previous footprint, but the southern wall of the house that he proposes to build is in exactly the same place as the southern wall of the previous property that he had on the block. He cannot build it there, because draft variation 200 says that he will overshadow-not the house next door-the driveway of the house next door, and one day somebody might want to build something in that driveway that will be overshadowed. So, what was possible before the fires is now not possible.

There is another person who rang me. This man is an invalid pensioner, and he lives in Kambah. The very large house that he occupies with his father, who is also an invalid pensioner, burnt down. They thought a big block would too much for them to handle and they would not be able to do the gardens. They applied to have a dual occupancy on the site.

The bank would lend them the money, and PALM would allow them to build it. What happens? Draft variation 200 comes along, and it is in an area where you cannot strata title your dual occupancy. The bank would continue to lend them the money to do it. They could afford to do it but, if they did it and rented out the other dual occupancy, they would lose their invalid pension.

This is what draft variation 200, the one-size-fits-all solution, does to people across Canberra-in Nicholls, Chapman, Duffy and Kambah. They are just a few of the people who have come to me. But do Ms Tucker and Mr Corbell care? I do not think they do. I do not think Ms Tucker cares about invalid pensioners in Kambah because there are not many Green votes in Kambah.

We made suggestions to this minister about how we might pull the fat out of the fire. I came to the minister and said, "Let's look at making draft variation 200 for the designated garden city suburbs and putting a sunset clause in it, so that we have to come back and revise it."

Mr Corbell: Which suburbs are they?

MRS DUNNE: We could have worked that out; I was prepared to negotiate. I do not want to see a draft variation affecting the way people build their houses in Nicholls, where they already have small blocks, or in places like Evatt and Kambah, which are not garden city suburbs. They never have been and never will be. There is no clamouring to stop suitable dual occupancies in Kambah. There might be in Downer; we might have to look at Downer. But you would not come to the party; you wouldn't negotiate.

Mr Corbell talks about planning for people. Before the election he talked about planning for people, but what happened afterwards was that the people were forgotten. That is another example of this minister talking the talk and, when it comes to the crunch, not walking the walk.

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