Page 2664 - Week 07 - Wednesday, 6 June 2012
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
Apart from impact track developments, the bill does not cover individual building approvals. As members would be aware, the way the planning system is set up means that the Assembly cannot easily change the requirements for individual building approvals. However, the bill does require the planning authority, ACTPLA, to revise the territory plan by December 2013 to ensure that planning is compatible with greenhouse gas targets. The territory plan would then need to be revised every five years after that with the same aim.
I would expect that this revision would lead to a number of changes in the planning codes which would require buildings to be consistent with our greenhouse gas reduction targets. In the short term this may mean a move to a seven-star EER requirement for residential buildings. Effectively, new office buildings in the ACT are built with, at the very least, a 4½ NABERS rating, because the commonwealth will not rent them if they are not. It might require that to move up to a five-star or 5½-star rating. I note that the ACT government in its now postponed plan for a new office building was going higher, I think, with a five-star NABERS rating. So that is quite achievable in the ACT. The bill would also require ACTPLA to report annually on greenhouse gas emissions expected from approved developments.
The planning system sorely needs such changes. The planning committee is currently looking at draft territory plan variation 306, which is a very large document. I have asked, and will ask again, how this code will impact on greenhouse gas emissions. Unfortunately, no-one seems to know. We cannot even say, “It won’t make a difference,” or, “It will make things worse.” We simply do not know. This bill would see a territory plan variation which would address our greenhouse gas reduction target.
Equally, when we decide to do new developments, be they new suburbs, new estates or new infrastructure, no-one seems to look at the impact they are going to have on the ACT’s greenhouse gas emissions. Given that we are committed to reducing them, it seems crazy to just keep developing the ACT without any idea of what this is doing to greenhouse gas emissions. This bill would change this, as ACTPLA would look at larger scale developments and also report annually on expected emissions from approved developments.
While I am not optimistic enough to think that this bill will be passed in its present form, I am optimistic enough to think that what it will do is prompt ACTPLA, the government and some parts of the wider community to think about the issue and come up with good ideas to address it. I am pleased to say that while my success rate in actually getting my planning bills passed is not high, my success rate in getting out the ideas behind the bills being implemented is significantly higher. I thank ACTPLA and the planning minister for the cooperation I have had in the past, and hope to have in the future.
In summary I think the idea that new development may well have an impact on greenhouse gas emissions and is something that needs to be considered is an idea whose time has come in the ACT. Given that, I commend this bill to the Assembly.
Debate (on motion by Mr Corbell) adjourned to the next sitting.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video