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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 07 Hansard (Wednesday, 30 June 2004) . . Page.. 3072 ..

important tool that, from time to time, helps break through the nonsense. There have been occasions where many members in this place have gone to planning ministers and begged them to use their call-in powers. Not just members of the major parties but members from the crossbench have from time to time said, “This cannot be allowed to happen.”

We must remember that the minister can exercise his call-in powers not only to approve but also to reject an application. It is a double-edged sword. It is not that the minister is going to spend his time saying, “Oh, which developer can I please today?” or “Which community group can I please today by knocking off a development?” There are enough checks and balances. The call-in power is a powerful tool and it needs to be exercised with care and caution. All of us should observe and be very vigilant. We need to be critical of the minister when he acts inappropriately.

Earlier this year in the case of Karralika we saw the potential for the minister to act in a way that may not have been in the spirit of the act. However, that was fairly much nipped in the bud by the vigilance of this place. As things currently stand, we must always be observant and vigilant about the operation of power and we should never close our minds to perhaps more changes and more constraints.

It has been put to me that perhaps the exercise of call-in powers might become a disallowable or an allowable instrument. At this stage, I am not prepared to go that far. I think we need to wait and see whether the changes that were made in 2002 work. So far the call-in power has been used on five occasions. Perhaps in the context of the new review of the land act, which we will see in the next Assembly, we may revisit this and want to apply more constraints. But never should we propose removing that power from the minister.

MS DUNDAS (4.58): The ACT Democrats will be supporting this bill. The Assembly did not support amendments we moved to the Planning and Land Bill when the Assembly debated that legislation a little while ago and it is quite clear that it will not be supporting this bill today. We have had this debate in the last Assembly and in this Assembly and it is disappointing that the outcome will be no different.

This bill removes the so-called call-in powers of the planning minister from the Land (Planning and Environment) Act. The ACT Democrats went to the 2001 election with a very clear commitment to oppose the continued operation of call-in powers in our planning system. Planning call-in powers undermine our system of planning and they reduce the certainty of the rights and responsibilities that residents and developers expect to have. Planning call-in powers subvert the role of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal, which has been installed as an independent arbiter of the relative merits of a case.

I know that this Assembly has previously exhibited a dim view of appeal rights, as it has had few qualms in quashing them to speed up the construction of the Gungahlin Drive extension. But I am happy once again to state clearly that the Democrats see appeal rights as a crucial element of our planning system and they should not be tampered with.

We have created an appeals system to ensure that the outcomes of our planning system are implemented fairly and justly. The role played by the AAT ensures that there is an independent umpire on planning decisions, not a politically influenced one. This is

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