Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2017 Week 12 Hansard (Thursday, 26 October 2017) . . Page.. 4467 ..
MR GENTLEMAN: But obviously from what we have seen of late, it may not be the best idea. It may be better to go down a simple rigorous track of the normal—
Mr Coe: Point of order.
MADAM SPEAKER: Resume your seat, please. Point of order.
Mr Coe: Madam Speaker, on relevance, the question was specifically about pre-DA consultation as opposed to pre-Territory Plan variation consultation. I ask the minister to be directly relevant to pre-DA consultation.
MADAM SPEAKER: I do not believe there is a point of order because I heard the minister say that it was his idea and he has been discussing the pre-DA consultation. Minister, do you want to continue?
MR GENTLEMAN: Thank you, Madam Speaker. As I said, we thought this was a good idea to have a panel that was assisted, of course, by the directorate because they have the knowledge in regard to development applications and the planning regulations in the territory.
MS LAWDER: Minister, is the government planning to conduct pre-DA consultations on behalf of Yowani and Murrumbidgee country clubs?
MR GENTLEMAN: I thank Ms Lawder for the supplementary. I had a conversation with the director-general of planning this morning in relation to the operation of this consultation we have recently had. It does not appear that it has worked the way we wanted it to. Rather than provide information for the community to have input, it seems that it has been used in a political sense in the chamber. I am not sure whether we should use it at all any more. It might be better to simply use the normal process of putting a DA into ACTPLA and going through that process.
MS LE COUTEUR: Minister, given that it was described as a “community panel and consultation”, why was the subject matter of the consultation so restricted as to be just what the Federal Golf Club put forward and why did it not encompass some of the ideas from the community?
MR GENTLEMAN: I thank Ms Le Couteur for the question. Of course there need to be some parameters around consultation. If the consultation is about that particular development, then that is the topic of discussion. But it goes beyond that, and as we have seen through this process many other issues have been raised. As I said, we will review the process.
We learned on my most recent trip to other jurisdictions that when you try different processes of consultation that do not work, there is an opportunity to try other ones, and we will continue to do that.
Mental health—Raphael review
MRS DUNNE: My question is to the Minister for Mental Health. Minister, in 2015 the government commissioned Professor Beverley Raphael to undertake a