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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2015 Week 09 Hansard (Thursday, 13 August 2015) . . Page.. 2894 ..

Territory plan variation 327 includes a number of interesting changes to the territory plan. Some of it is rezoning urban open space. Who was the great champion in opposition against rezoning urban open space? None other than Mr Corbell. Mr Hanson may well touch on that in his remarks about Mr Corbell’s campaigns and the petitions in 1998, 1999, 2000 and 2001 with regard to urban open space. He fought rezoning and said a Labor government would not do it. How many times has Minister Corbell rezoned urban open space for one of his pet projects? This is not a man of principle; this is a man who gives priority to his own pet projects ahead of the wishes of the community.

The Canberra Liberals firmly believe what we have seen today is the very demonstration of why we need to disallow variations 327 and 347. The trickiness and the fact that this government try to pull swifties over anyone at any time are the very concerns so many people in the community have with regard to giving them more power and more money. This government is addicted to taxation and spending but it does not seem to have an eye for principle or for policy. This government is more interested in its own pet projects than the wishes and will of the community.

I urge those opposite to vote alongside Minister Corbell on his own motion. I presume he is doing that; one would think that when you move a rejection you mean it. I therefore commend Mr Corbell’s motion to the Assembly, and I encourage all to do the same.

MR GENTLEMAN (Brindabella—Minister for Planning, Minister for Roads and Parking, Minister for Workplace Safety and Industrial Relations, Minister for Children and Young People and Minister for Ageing) (4.35): I am pleased to speak to the motion today. I will go to some of the detail of draft variation 347; Mr Corbell talked earlier about 327. We are trying to provide some certainty here. I remind the Legislative Assembly of the outstanding merits of the territory plan variation 347, University of Canberra. Variation 347 is intended primarily to implement the master plan for the University of Canberra in accordance with the University of Canberra Act. This will provide certainty for the future growth and development of the university, with streamlined approvals processes and minimal red tape. The opposition always calls on minimising red tape, so it is important to understand those calls here, too.

DV 347, among other things, clarifies the uses permitted under the territory plan at the university. It is important to note that many of those at present are already permitted uses on the site. Variation 347 seeks to remove any doubt about what uses may or may not be developed at the university. It goes further by introducing additional development controls in relation to future building heights and floor areas across the site. This will ultimately define the scale and extent of future development at the university.

The variation will assist the University of Canberra to improve its competitiveness and economic viability. It does that by allowing additional development and commercialisation of the university’s assets consistent with the University of Canberra Act. This will mean the university will be more autonomous and rely less on government resources in the future. Further development of the campus will also increase UC’s local, national and international competitiveness.

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