Page 3642 - Week 10 - Tuesday, 26 August 2008
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
being able formally to consider state, territory and local government planning and environmental policies of the jurisdiction in which an airport is located during assessment of airport master plans and major developments.
The submission also proposes revised arrangements for airport master plans, including the appointment of an independent panel in each state and territory to assess airport master plans and major planning proposals for airports. The independent panel was suggested to comprise three appointments by the federal minister for transport and two from the relevant state or territory government nominated by the planning minister in that jurisdiction.
Importantly, the submission proposed a strengthened and extended consultation process with the community to keep local communities informed throughout the development and implementation phases of the airport’s master planning process. The strengthened consultative process would enable both the airport owners and operators and the local community to be more informed about each other’s requirements, provide more transparency on implementation of proposals, enable a continuing change of information and promote harmonious relationships between these key stakeholders.
I reiterate the planning minister’s comments that the ACT government will remain active in ensuring that the ACT community is afforded adequate protection from aircraft noise. I also take this opportunity to point out that the ACT government, through the Canberra spatial plan, has adopted specific planning arrangements to ensure that residential development does not occur in areas under the approach and departure paths to and from Canberra International Airport. These planning arrangements are more stringent than those adopted in most other Australian jurisdictions.
In regard to Mr Mulcahy’s statements on members’ air travel, I should advise members that most travellers—and members, of course—can purchase offsets to their carbon use on air travel. This option is usually on a pop-up or a link on the aircraft’s website.
In conclusion, I would like to reaffirm that, although the Australian government has principal responsibility for the development of the airport and control of on-airport activities, the ACT government has been active in seeking to influence policy outcomes in relation to airport planning and development. I reiterate that, while the ACT government supports the Canberra International Airport as an important element of the ACT’s economy, expansion of the airport must be well planned and managed to take into account a range of impacts including economic, social and environmental and heritage impacts.
MR SPEAKER: The discussion is concluded.
Personal explanation
DR FOSKEY (Molonglo): Under standing order 46, I would like to correct some misrepresentations that were made. They were made by three people. Mr Barr suggested that the Greens were fairly ignorant of ACT and national responsibility—
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .