Page 731 - Week 03 - Tuesday, 8 April 2014
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
is significant demand for the proposed secure mental health facility and a clear need for the government to deliver the project as soon as practical.
Another concern about this bill is that a restriction declaration will allow for a decision to be made without referring the proposal to the Heritage Council or the Conservator of Flora and Fauna. The declaration also prevents any new heritage or tree registrations.
Members and the public may be disappointed to discover that, although our current planning processes include these referrals now, the legislation is quite weak in these areas and ACTPLA is already able to make decisions contrary to the council or conservator’s recommendations. A restriction declaration just makes this absolutely clear and prevents these agencies giving their advice.
A restriction declaration is a separate disallowable instrument. Thus, if the Assembly supports a particular project but still wants heritage or tree protection retained, it can decide to do that. I note that even with a restriction declaration, registered trees and declared heritage sites need to be protected. Although registered trees will continue to have protection even in special project sites under this legislation, a restriction declaration would mean that regulated trees or trees of a certain size would not have such protection. This is obviously not ideal and not something the Greens would ordinarily support. However the current planning legislation already allows for ACTPLA to override the conservator’s advice on this matter.
Also, in case it is not spelt out clearly enough, I would like to underline the fact that all other environmental considerations in our planning legislation still stand in the case of any special projects. The Greens do not support any erosion of protection of our biodiversity in our planning system.
In relation to the heritage issues in this bill, members would be aware of the Heritage Bill currently before the Assembly which introduces the capacity for ministerial call-in powers, something the ACT Greens and many in the community have been concerned about. I believe this power made a mockery of the heritage listing process as it would essentially, just as with call ins in the Planning and Development Act, allow the minister to make the decision about heritage value rather than the independent body, the Heritage Council. Essentially, the minister would decide that the site did not have heritage value in order to allow the development to go ahead. This clause is fully against the interests of protecting heritage and transparent decision-making.
I have discussed this issue with my cabinet colleagues and requested that the call-in powers in the Heritage Bill be removed. The government has subsequently committed to amending the Heritage Bill to remove these powers. This bill before us today gives that power to override heritage considerations, but the executive and then the Assembly get to make this decision noting that these heritage values are being overridden. They explicitly note that and have to make that decision rather than a minister making a decision determining that a site has no heritage value. It is quite a different process.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video