Page 1974 - Week 07 - Thursday, 23 August 2007
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
The land act provides for specific criteria in relation to the exercise of the call-in power. I have used my call-in powers in this instance because I consider the proposal will substantially contribute to the achievement of objectives for land that is subject to the community facilities land use policies of the territory plan.
Development on this site represents an outcome that meets community needs for community services and facilities in an appropriate and accessible location. It also contributes to the implementation of high-level planning policies that aim to ensure that provision is made for a comprehensive range of readily accessible community, cultural, sporting and recreational facilities, distributed according to the varying needs of different localities and population groups. It contributes to the provision of high-quality education facilities in Canberra, thus providing opportunity for the community’s long-term wellbeing.
I consider the proposal will provide a substantial public benefit arising from the provision of a significant integrated education establishment catering for students from pre-school to high school, which also serves as a focus for broader community use. This also provides a welcome response to the closure of the former Ginninderra district high school and a number of suburban primary schools.
Section 229B of the land act specifies that, if I decide an application, I must table a statement in the Legislative Assembly within three sitting days of the decision. As required by the land act, and for the benefit of members, I table, as delegate for the Minister for Planning, a statement providing a description of the development, details of the land on which the development is proposed to take place, the name of the applicant, details of my decision and grounds for the decision.
Finally, I wish to express my appreciation for the assistance rendered to me by officers of the ACT Planning and Land Authority in enabling me to fully appreciate the rather complex nature of this particular issue.
Planning and Development Bill 2006
Detail stage
Debate resumed.
Clauses 30 to 44.
MRS DUNNE (Ginninderra) (4.31): It is with great pleasure that I stand to support Mr Seselja’s amendments to this bill, because they are consistent with the position that the Canberra Liberals have taken ever since the establishment of the Land Development Agency. In thinking about this matter, I looked back at what was said in the debate on the establishment of the Land Development Agency on 12 December 2002. It was really very useful to do so. I was struck by many of the things that Mr Corbell said then in defence of the Land Development Agency. This is one of the standouts. When he said this, I am not sure whether he really believed that this was the role of the Land Development Agency or whether he hoped this would be its role, but it certainly has not come about. He said:
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .