Page 616 - Week 02 - Thursday, 20 March 2014
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
The proposed process will require that such restrictions and the justifications for them are subject to public comment and scrutiny as well as review and comment by the Heritage Council and the Conservator of Flora and Fauna. The restrictions and comments must be presented to the Assembly. The Assembly will have the power to disallow the restrictions, along with the special precinct area variation. This is a clear, transparent and accountable process.
I would also note that this process effectively removes the need to proceed with the proposed ministerial call-in powers set out in the Heritage Legislation Amendment Bill 2013. The government will therefore be proposing amendments to remove the call-in powers from that bill. Importantly, the bill also includes a measure for the recognition of specific development proposals and for these to be given priority. Specifically, the bill inserts new division 7.2.8 into the Planning and Development Act, which provides for the declaration of projects of major significance. Such declaration would be able to be made on its own or in association with the creation of a special precinct area. This is a key feature of this bill. Importantly, the process for the declaration of projects of major significance will be open and transparent.
As I have already noted, the draft declaration must be subject to public consultation over a 30-day period. The minister and the executive must consider the draft declaration in light of those public comments. The draft must then be presented to the Legislative Assembly for consideration. The declaration will not take effect until these steps have taken place.
In short, the declaration will not take effect until the Canberra community has had its say. This process supports the central aim of the bill: transparency. A declaration of a project of major significance will enable that project to proceed with efficiency, certainty and finality. The government wants to ensure that major projects with a substantial public benefit cannot be held up by a third party appeal or through the use of other legislation.
The declaration will achieve this by removing the project from ACAT merit review and also removing the project from Supreme Court review under the Administrative Decision (Judicial Review) Act 1989. The bill will also limit or seek to limit applications to the Supreme Court for review under the common law. Specifically, the bill will require any such applications to be made within 60 days of the making of the reviewable decision.
These features and the restriction of merit review in relation to special precinct areas do involve the removal of certain rights of review. But this is done to ensure as far as possible that relevant projects are not tied up in litigation for months or years. In practice, such delays can determine whether a project proceeds on time or at all. These measures are also proposed to ensure that as far as possible the relevant development approval decisions are final and not open to uncertain change through the court system.
These measures are some of the efficiencies proposed in this bill. In considering these proposals it is important to keep in mind that other arguably more timely avenues for
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video