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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2003 Week 14 Hansard (11 December) . . Page.. 5236 ..

MS TUCKER (continuing):

The government's response to that recommendation was that it had an early allocation category 1. We know that but, as this committee rightly pointed out, problems are still being experienced. The government's response did not address that issue which is still occurring. Unfortunately, it is a problem for women in that situation. I have said many times in this place that secure and safe housing is a pretty fundamental and basic right for anyone in the community. However, it is an issue of concern for women who are escaping from domestic violence.

Referring to the general question of the gender-based analysis, I commend the minister for her statement that she will be including a women's analysis in her policy. As I said earlier, a gender analysis would be better but it is good to see that such an analysis has been structured into this government's business. I acknowledge that the government has taken that big step forward.


MR HARGREAVES (12.12): I move:

That so much of the standing orders be suspended as would prevent Assembly business having precedence after the discussion of a matter of public importance.

Essentially, this motion will enable the Assembly to conclude debate on the report of the Standing Committee on Planning and Environment on variation 175 to the Territory Plan when debate on the matter of public importance has been concluded. As the time allocated for Assembly business expires at 12.37, another motion will have to be moved to extend debate on that issue after conclusion of debate on the matter of public importance.

Question resolved in the affirmative, with the concurrence of an absolute majority.

Planning and Environment-Standing Committee

Report No 14 - government response

Debate resumed from 17 June 2003, on motion by Mr Corbell:

That the Assembly takes note of the paper.

MRS DUNNE (12.14): The report of the Standing Committee on Planning and Environment on draft variation 175 to the Territory Plan is the culmination of an important inquiry into an often-underestimated aspect of ACT planning policy. The committee was less than satisfied with and moderately scathing in its criticism of the Planning and Land Management Group's preparation of reports and its lack of vision in relation to industrial land-use policy in the ACT. I was somewhat disheartened when I established that the committee, after taking submissions from a large cross-section of people who use industrial land in the ACT, found in the government's response a "steady as you go"approach to this issue.

The government said, "We have been doing it like this for the last 40 years and this is how we will continue to do it."That was the tenor of the draft variation received by the

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