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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2003 Week 10 Hansard (23 September) . . Page.. 3534 ..

MR SMYTH (continuing):

If Mr Corbell is not censured today, we will have set-Mr Corbell talked about standards-a very low standard. That standard will now be that you are only accountable every three years. I want to refer Mr Corbell back to what he said about the Old Red Hill motion, which this Assembly passed, calling on me to review it. I said this:

Should this motion get up today-and it would appear that there are the numbers for it to get up-we-

that is, the previous government-

... will conduct the review that has been asked for by the Assembly. My opinion and the opinion of the government, as is clear through the variation, is that we have got the balance right. But if it is the will of the Assembly, I will have a review carried out.

Mr Corbell was not happy with that. The government said, "We think we've got it right but, if the Assembly says we want something else, we'll do what the Assembly wants."What did Mr Corbell say? People should listen very closely to Mr Corbell's interpretation, when in opposition, of what motions in the Assembly meant. He closes the debate by saying:

I thank those members who have indicated their support for this motion. But I want to place very clearly and strongly on the record my view as to how the government should respond to this motion, assuming that the Assembly votes shortly to pass it. My recommendation to the minister is very explicit, in that it asks the minister to direct the ACT Planning Authority to review the Territory Plan as it relates to Old Red Hill to provide for a development intensity of no more than one dwelling on any block in the Red Hill housing precinct. It is an explicit recommendation. It is an explicit review.

I do not want the minister to go away from this place thinking he can undertake a review and come back to this place and say there is no need to change it. I believe the majority of members in this place feel strongly that dual occupancy development cannot be allowed in the Old Red Hill precinct if its heritage significance is to be properly protected. I would like the minister, if and when he undertakes this review-assuming that the Assembly supports my motion-to know that that is the very clear wish of this place. Our wish is that he not just conduct a review but conduct a review recognising that this Assembly believes that there should be no dual occupancy development in the Old Red Hill precinct. It is incumbent upon him to treat that very seriously.

I think Mr Corbell has been hoist by the political petard of his own words.

Mr Corbell: It is the direction of powers in the land act.

MR SMYTH: Mr Speaker, I commend this motion to the Assembly.

Question put:

That the motion be agreed to.

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