Page 4771 - Week 15 - Tuesday, 13 December 2005
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Mr Seselja has mentioned that there was a paragraph devoted to outlining the success of the Land Development Agency. That is correct. It is part of the committee’s role to report on objectives that are clear and measurable, to focus on results and outcomes and to discuss results against expectations, among other things. I can only assume Mr Seselja is referring to paragraph 1.20, as he has never entered into discussions with the committee as to what was in his dissenting comments.
This paragraph goes on to talk about the LDA and the success of the financial outcomes delivered to the ACT government. In its second year of operation, the agency achieved an operational surplus of more than $100 million, that is, $100 million that is going towards building our future; $100 million going back into the ACT community. That is quite a different approach from that of a former Liberal government of allowing such profits to remain in the pockets of private developers.
Mr Seselja is correct in saying that questions taken on notice in report hearings are required to be responded to in five working days, but Mr Seselja neglected to mention that that it is five working days from the receipt of the Hansard.
Another issue that needs to be addressed today is the fact that Mr Seselja has previously complained about not receiving draft reports with enough time to read them, but he would not allow the committee the chance to read his dissenting comments until the report was tabled this morning. I guess it is just another case of one rule for the committee and one for Mr Seselja.
As to Mr Seselja’s comments about affordable housing, this is referred to in recommendation 4, which I will read out:
The Committee recommends that the Land Development Agency and the Government continue to pursue mechanisms for making housing affordable, particularly for first home buyers.
This was discussed in the committee’s deliberations on the draft annual report and was obviously adopted as it appears as a recommendation in the report.
Mr Seselja also criticised the report for not addressing road safety issues. I have read through the evidence of the Minister for Urban Services in the Hansard of the annual report hearings and cannot find any road safety issues that were raised and not added to the report other than the issue of the safety of on-road cycle lanes. Minister Hargreaves quoted from the sustainable transport plan. Mr Seselja alluded to that text in his dissenting report. The key issues of the sustainable transport plan state:
A sustainable transport system must seek a fair balance between the community’s strategic social, economic and environmental transport needs. Thus, the Sustainable Transport Plan addresses strategic issues including the need to provide:
safety and security for users and the community;
an appropriate balance between modes—walking, cycling, public transport and private cars;
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .