Page 3171 - Week 07 - Thursday, 1 July 2010
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
We saw the failure to sell blocks on the corners of Northbourne Avenue and London Circuit recently. And whilst that is not part of ACTPLA, there is no doubt that there is a lack of coordination at the moment in areas around planning, property development and land sales. I think splitting the tasks between two different ministers, between a land development agency and a land and property services department that works to Mr Stanhope and a planning and land authority which works to Mr Barr, is a mistake.
Let us go through how they have tried to make up for that. They have tried to make up for that by establishing a major projects facilitation unit within the Chief Minister’s Department. Then they turned the major projections facilitation unit, along with a number of other areas, into the land and property services department. Then we had an announcement that an individual within land and property services would be responsible for coordination. That smacks of slapdash policy, where every few months we will try something different, because it is not working.
I would suggest that the first step would be for one minister to be responsible for planning and for the Land Development Agency. I think that would be one step forward in getting better planning outcomes in the territory. I think the failure to sell those blocks is indicative of a couple of things. Yes, there is a softening commercial property market. That has been exacerbated, I think, by the government’s plans to build its own new government office building, therefore creating a lot more empty stock—another 40,000 or 50,000 square metres of empty stock—in order to fill that building.
I think it has been exacerbated by that, but there are other reasons, including the uncertainty in the government’s approach. Their infrastructure plan, which was rightly condemned—it was widely and comprehensively condemned—does not provide certainty to industry. I think the ongoing rivalry between Mr Barr and Mr Stanhope in terms of these land releases for hotel sites—Mr Barr has got his hotel sites and Mr Stanhope says he will announce his—demonstrates that there does not seem to be any coordinated plan.
If you are a potential buyer looking at a hotel site, you would look down the road—and there is a very big block of land that sold for $99 million that also allows a hotel—and you would think that there is not a lot of certainty in the approach of the government and, therefore, you would be cautious.
Mr Coe: No vacancies.
MR SESELJA: Indeed. And that is exactly what we saw at those auctions where those blocks were passed in. We saw uncertainty and we saw, I understand, the blocks coming in well below the reserve price. I do not think that is any surprise, given the approach that the government has taken. (Second speaking period taken.) I do not think there is much surprise. All of those factors—the softening property market, the fact the government is planning to be a major player with a $300 million to $400 million office project, the lack of planning where hotel sites are going to be, the lack of infrastructure planning, all of those things—will be contributing significantly to the concerns in the community, in the investment community and in the development community who would be looking at whether or not they can actually make that site work at the price that is being asked.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video