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

None . . Page.. 1107 ..

I was struck early on as Minister by a high level of dissatisfaction across the community with the Land and Planning Appeals Board. The board's decisions, obviously, will never make all the people happy all of the time, but it seems that very few people actually understood the processes the board followed or were happy with them. The Government supports an inexpensive avenue of appeal on planning matters, but the existing model has suffered from the perception that its decisions were capricious and inconsistent. This is clearly not in the best interests of promoting certainty.

It is proposed that the functions of the Land and Planning Appeals Board will be transferred to the ACT Administrative Appeals Tribunal. I will be discussing the best way to implement this change in coming days with the President of the AAT of the ACT and officers of the Attorney-General's Department. The current AAT will deal with more complicated appeals and will provide legal advice to the planning division, which is what the board will become. The existing board will become a division of the AAT and will deal with simpler matters, often on a single-member basis. One member of the tribunal will be able to head an appeal, with an opportunity for a further full appeal, on limited grounds, to a full bench. This significant change to the structure of the board will improve the accountability, credibility and performance of the planning system in the ACT, particularly with respect to giving people an avenue of recourse which provides some certainty in that legal precedent will not be ignored.

In conclusion, let me say that many have trodden the path of reform in planning in the ACT before me, and many have failed to find consensus and resolution. I do not pretend that the initiatives in this statement are certain of ending controversy in ACT planning, but I do hope that these initiatives will begin to dismantle the almost institutionalised conflict we have witnessed. These reforms, particularly the establishment of local area planning advisory committees, operate on a simple premise, that is, that people are less likely to be hostile to planning changes if they are part of the process that furnishes those changes. Planning has often been seen as a contest between vested interests - those of residents, those of developers. I believe that, by placing a measure of responsibility on the shoulders of those who otherwise might wish to join the barricades, the broader community interest will come to the fore. In my experience, community interest is never contained purely within the negotiating positions of residents or of developers.

Many of today's initiatives are not about satisfying a vested interest but are rather about broader goals. The strategic plan and the subregion plan are about improving the face of tomorrow's Canberra. Limits on dwelling numbers in new residential areas and the urban design package are about raising our standards in planning. The retail strategy and aged relatives provisions are about making the urban environment friendlier for families. The changes to the Planning Authority and the appeals process are about providing greater control and certainty, and the local area planning advisory committees are essentially about something Kate Carnell has described as a touchstone for her Government, namely, local involvement and decision-making or, if you like, a more city style of government.

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