Page 2146 - Week 06 - Thursday, 7 May 2009
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
in the agreement relating to Molonglo. On that note, we look forward to seeing the strategic assessment of land to be released for development in the Molonglo Valley, based on ecological analysis, which has been flagged in the budget. And we look forward to greater information about the government’s plans for Molonglo in general.
I note also that the ratio of greenfield sites to town centre land release still shows that the government is relying substantially on greenfield sales as a key part of its revenue base. We need to find a way forward here. I hope that we can work together as a community to identify key areas which can be developed or redeveloped, instead of continuing to spread our suburban footprint across dwindling greenfields which tend to be of increasing ecological importance.
The Greens welcome the $1.7 million increase to ACTPLA’s budget which will help ensure that development applications are processed in a timely manner, and we look forward to seeing the statistics on waiting times improved. We also welcome the government’s proposal for a two-year moratorium on fees charged on delayed commercial developments.
We are very pleased to see that the Property Council’s proposal for commercial building energy efficiency tune-ups was taken on board by the government to the tune of $2 million. The scheme is a dollar for dollar arrangement with $500,000 available this year and $1.5 million the year after. This gives commercial building owners a two-year opportunity to access government funding to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions and also save money on energy bills.
However, instead of investing in innovative economic development in these difficult financial times, the government has inexplicably reduced funding to the business and development unit. If the government is serious about local employment, maintaining support for business development is essential. Part of the agreement was to fund a detailed government strategy to support a green economy in the ACT. We very much regret that the government has chosen not to fund that as yet.
The government appears to be happy for Canberra to continue to be a public service town supported largely by the construction industry, which is good. But we need to go further than that. The economy has to change to meet the environmental issues of the future, and our economy is not. We can change. We can build local jobs, for instance by retrofitting our houses to make them more energy efficient, doing the same to our offices and exporting the know-how we get from that successful scheme to the rest of Australia. We can export design know-how. We can export, for instance, the world-leading solar research at the ANU, which has led to significant economic developments—but not in the ACT.
Something that my colleagues have spoken about: we welcome the return of the library for the inner south. The location in Kingston should make it easier for young parents who visit libraries while they are grocery shopping and then pop in with their kids to hear story time or just browse the books; for workers so that they can order a book online and then pop in at lunchtime and pick it up or use the internet services. Public transport is a lot better to Kingston than it was to the old site.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .