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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2008 Week 06 Hansard (Wednesday, 25 June 2008) . . Page.. 1923 ..

planners, CB Richard Ellis, stated that the Tuggeranong block was only one of two proposed power stations, and it is obvious by a process of elimination that the other one does come in at Belconnen.

There was a meeting on 6 August at which CB Richard Ellis talked to ActewAGL and the LDA about this. Other documents from that meeting say:

The proposed solution will enable ActewAGL to properly manage power delivery and guarantee very high levels of power availability necessary for non-stop data centre operations compliant with the highest international ratings ... This will be achieved by integrating the power load … power generation, synchronisation and switching infrastructure into a single manageable solution ... The proposed development offers: On-site secure power supply from a gas-fired power station to be constructed by ActewAGL.

There is an aerial photograph prepared by CB Richard Ellis. It is held by the ACT government and shows over two hectares of power assets separate to, but adjoining the 14.7 hectares of data centre at Belconnen. These power assets are 200 metres from the indicative boundary of the west Macgregor development.

ACTPLA believed that the Belconnen facility would be a duplicate of the southern facility, and there is a briefing, which states:

I attended a briefing by … (CBRE) and … (ActewAGL) on the proposal for a data centre and gas-fired power station at Hume and a parallel/duplicate data centre at—

the next bit is blacked out so we do not know where the location is:

proposing connecting the two centres by fibre optic—

This is an internal email from officers of ACTPLA to elsewhere. It is perfectly plain from this—(Time expired.)

MR BARR (Molonglo—Minister for Education and Training, Minister for Planning, Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation, Minister for Industrial Relations) (3.21): Mr Speaker, I will not be supporting the motion. It is nothing more than a political stunt. It appears to be politically designed to politicise the independent planning assessment process in the territory. The ACT has an independent planning authority and a statutory process for the assessment of proposed developments. This government, in 2003, established an independent planning authority capable of assessing development applications at arms length from political interference. The Canberra city technology project is still being rigorously and independently assessed by the Planning and Land Authority.

For the benefit of those opposite I will take the opportunity now, particularly in response to paragraph (2) of Mr Seselja’s motion, to outline the process for assessment. The development application was accepted by the Planning and Land Authority on 31 March 2008. According to the transitional arrangements in the Planning and Development Act, an act that, from memory, was passed unanimously in this place, the land act continues to apply in relation to the application.

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