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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1998 Week 2 Hansard (20 May) . . Page.. 363 ..

MS TUCKER (continuing):

In debating the Bill put forward by Ms Horodny, the Government put forward some amendments that enable limited appeal rights, but these changes do not go far enough towards reversing the changes of 1996. As Ms Horodny said last year, there are currently many areas in the Land Act where there is no recourse to the Supreme Court. For example, the community has no power to challenge the Minister's decision over the adequacy of environmental assessments of particular development proposals.

In the Bill before us today I have not included the more complex open standing provisions that caused so much worry for the Labor and Liberal parties last year. I am simply seeking to reinstate the rights of citizens to seek a review of any planning decisions that they believe are not in accordance with law. I look forward to both Labor and Liberal reconsidering their position from last year - particularly the Labor Party, who have provided some indications that they are considering a different approach to planning issues in this Assembly.

I would like to remind the Labor Party that the liberalised standing provision in the AD(JR) Act was inserted when the Labor Party was in government in 1991. The then Attorney-General, Mr Connolly, when introducing the AD(JR) (Amendment) Bill, said:

This Bill gives effect to concerns that there should be wide standing to seek review of administrative matters in respect of planning and land use matters.

Labor and Liberal, in voting against Ms Horodny's Bill last year, provided no evidence that the section had been abused.

Mr Speaker, I would like to briefly foreshadow further planning legislation that I intend to introduce in the near future. The first is also related to extending appeal rights in the AAT. I will be seeking to remove the requirement for a person seeking a review of a decision under the Land Act to demonstrate that their interests are substantially and adversely affected by the decision. Secondly, I will be seeking to require that environmental assessments, reports, statements and inquiries required under the Land Act be prepared by the relevant ACT department and not the proponent. This has been an issue the Greens have pursued for some time, as has Mr Moore. Unfortunately, Mr Moore's amendments to the Land Act in 1996 were defeated.

In conclusion, the Government argued at the time of introducing its amendments to the Land Act in 1996 that it wanted to eliminate trivial appeals that might hold up development; but the changes it has introduced to the Land Act and the AD(JR) Act have gone far beyond this, to really limit the ability of the public to ensure that the Government and its administrators fully carry out their legal responsibilities under the Land Act.

An article titled "Ruling a pointer to loss of rights" in the Canberra Times on Monday of this week highlights the extent to which appeal rights have been cut back by this Government, with the support of the ALP, over the previous few years. The president of the AAT was highlighting the fact that there is no longer any right to appeal to the tribunal against a planning approval involving single residential developments, even if the proposal did not meet performance measures in the Territory Plan.

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