Page 3177 - Week 09 - Tuesday, 18 August 2009

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


will ensure the development takes longer and costs more. Her recommendation D tries to address building issues through the territory plan. Choosing the wrong vehicle to regulate an activity really leads to red tape.

There are also clear inconsistencies in Ms Le Couteur’s approach. In her dissenting report she says:

I think there is not an overwhelming case for a 10 storey tower, particularly in the proposed location. It has been strongly opposed by the community and therefore I do not support the Committee’s Recommendation 6.

Recommendation 6 is that the 10-storey development be allowed. In a press release of 24 July Ms Le Couteur says:

Higher density in major town centres makes sense on an economic, social and environmental basis … These sites next to Woden are prime locations to have some higher density on the basis of public transport planning alone.

The press release was titled “Government fails on both sides of Woden”, so it seems she wants lower densities on the western side of Woden and higher densities on the eastern side. I recall that Dr Foskey once disparagingly remarked about the old Burnie Court site in the Canberra Times as being “more and more units being squeezed onto the block to increase the return”. Where do the Greens stand on density? I ask that as a serious question.

As an aside, in Ms Le Couteur’s press release of 24 July, she interestingly suggests that ACTPLA make variations to the territory plan. I am sure that she now realises that she and, in fact, all other members of this place make planning policy. ACTPLA independently enforces the planning policy that we, the Assembly, set. We—that is, this side of the chamber—want to keep politics out of planning.

I thank Nicola Derigo in her role as the committee secretary and all the secretariat staff for all their hard work. I would also like to thank my committee members, Caroline Le Couteur and Alistair Coe, and all witnesses and those who submitted to the inquiry.

Finally, I would like to say, however, that if one is serious about making a difference on climate change, some difficult decisions need to be made. I invite the Greens and my Liberal colleagues to take up this challenge in our next inquiry—RZ3 and RZ4 residential redevelopment policies in the inner north of Canberra. That inquiry will provide a great litmus test for the opposition parties’ ability to see beyond the short-term politics and contribute to long-term policy that actually makes a difference. I urge my colleagues to take this inquiry seriously, and I look forward to working with them on this important task.

Ms LE COUTEUR (Molonglo) (10.47): As before, I would like to thank the planning committee’s secretary, Nicola Derigo, and my fellow committee members, Ms Porter and Mr Coe. I will not go through the majority report at great length because, with the exception, as Ms Porter has pointed out, of recommendation 6, the 10-storey element, I agree with the majority report and I think that all the suggestions there would improve the development, if implemented by the government.


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