Page 1264 - Week 04 - Thursday, 7 April 2016
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
exists in an unregulated process, and I am sure members might be wondering how this could possibly be a reduction in red-tape. Well, the increase in regulation is offset by the benefit of a formal mechanism to allow a proponent to lodge the development application in anticipation of the variation, thus saving a considerable period of time.
New section 137AA is not a free ride to a territory plan variation; rather, it is a means to get things started. Any variation must still go through exactly the same legislated processes as happen now. The bill does not change this, and the proponent must assess the risks of the variation changing in some fundamental way that will mean either the proposal is not viable or not commenced at all. For this very reason the DA process remains a voluntary mechanism for the proponent to elect to enter.
New section 137AB is similar to new section 137AA except that it allows a concurrent DA to be lodged after a draft territory plan variation has already been open for public consultation. Without the variation commencing under sections 83 or 84, the concurrent DA remains one that cannot be approved because it contains elements that are prohibited.
New section 137AD allows a development application to be made if an encroachment application under new section 137AC has been made and a declaration issued. Each of these concurrent DAs must be assessed as if the territory plan had been varied. I reiterate that it remains that the minister responsible for planning and land management or the Planning and Land Authority are prohibited from deciding a concurrent DA until the concurrent process is completed.
The concurrent DA cannot even be approved with conditions that it does not take effect until the territory plan is varied. This was a very conscious decision of government and honours the assurances given to the community when the Planning Act first commenced in 2007.
The remaining provision of new section 137AC, as mentioned by Mr Coe, allows a proponent to seek a declaration from the Planning and Land Authority that an encroachment into adjoining land is minor and would, if allowed, promote sensible and well-measured planning outcomes.
If a declaration is given, the proponent can make an application under new section 137AD to vary the territory plan by the technical amendment process. Any technical amendment made must be open for consultation for a minimum of 35 days and not the normal 20 working days.
I would now like to move to the provisions inserted by clause 37. These provisions form the nuts and bolts of the new concurrent DA processes. New section 147AA inserts the definitions that achieve the minimal regulatory approach required by this government’s agenda for reduction of red tape. Three principal definitions are created: “concurrent consultation period”, “concurrent DA”, and “concurrent document”. An additional definition for “concurrent extension period” is also created.
I will not go into the specifics of each definition. Instead I would like to say that the bill creates a hierarchy of planning documents for the concurrent process. A
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video