Page 360 - Week 02 - Tuesday, 14 February 2017
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
This amendment will impact on a small number of developments each year. However, closing this gap in the legislation ensures that significant developments with multiple buildings totalling over 7,000 square metres are required to engage the community at the earliest stage.
This amendment demonstrates the government’s commitment to bring planning back to the people and ensure that the community has a say in how the local area develops. While on paper it has a minor regulatory impact for major developments, I consider this to be mandating what good developers already do and what should really be industry best practice. I see this as an opportunity for developers to garner community support for their proposals and to achieve high quality development outcomes.
The final minor policy amendment that I would like to revisit is made by clause 4 of the bill. This amendment removes section 10 from the Climate Change and Greenhouse Gas Reduction Act 2010. Section 10 requires the responsible minister to set an energy efficiency target. However, since that act was made, a new act, the Energy Efficiency (Cost of Living) Improvement Act 2012, has come into effect. This new energy efficiency act now comprehensively provides for energy efficiency targets and objectives in the territory through the energy efficiency improvement scheme. The energy efficiency act makes the requirement to set an energy efficiency target in section 10 of the Climate Change and Greenhouse Gas Reduction Act 2010 redundant and unnecessary regulatory duplication.
This amendment is not a reduction of the government’s energy efficiency and sustainability goals. It does not represent a softening of the government’s commitment to deal with the causes of global warming. It is merely the removal of a redundant provision in the interests of ensuring that legislative requirements are located in the most appropriate acts and are not unnecessarily duplicated.
In my introduction speech, I talked about a number of technical amendments contained in the bill. I will not revisit these amendments today other than to say that the technical and editorial amendments contained in the bill are made to improve the legislative drafting and provide greater clarity around the intent and operation of these provisions. My colleague has provided a number of examples of these amendments to demonstrate their usefulness and how they are effective in addressing the goals of this bill, and I want to thank Ms Lawder for her contribution.
In summary, I think it is apparent that this bill has fulfilled its purpose in making minor amendments to ensure that planning, building and environment laws remain effective, up to date and clear in changing circumstances. I commend the bill to the Assembly.
Question resolved in the affirmative.
Bill agreed to in principle.
Leave granted to dispense with the detail stage.
Bill agreed to.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video