Page 3317 - Week 09 - Thursday, 24 August 2017
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
known sites registered under the act. This also removes any issues with retrospectivity of the new measures.
However, those who are storing certain quantities of dangerous substances and have not registered the premises by the time the amendments commence will be required to lodge a DA to continue storing the substances. The bill also requires a DA to be lodged if a lessee wants to begin storing a quantity of dangerous substances that would require the land to be a registrable premise even if such storage is already an authorised use under the lease. Regulation in these circumstances is considered fair and appropriate because these storage sites are not presently regulated under the Dangerous Substances Act.
The government is of the view that the bill is considered and reasonable and is a way of monitoring, from a planning perspective, the storage of certain quantities of dangerous substances to ensure the safety of the community. Those parts of the bill that regulate and relate to the dangerous substances will be commenced by notice so as to provide the government with the opportunity to ensure that industry and the community are well aware of the new provisions and their obligations before the provisions commence.
I would now like to turn to the other amendments made by the bill. There are two other sets of amendments made to the Planning and Development Act by the bill. The first relates to permitting a proponent to apply for an environmental significance opinion for a development on contaminated land. The second relates to the referral of draft Territory Plan variations to the relevant committee of the Legislative Assembly by the minister.
I would like to talk about the amendments relating to contaminated land first of all. Section 21A of the Environment Protection Act 1997 establishes the register of contaminated sites. Section 123 of the Planning and Development Act provides that the impact track applies to a development proposal if it is a kind mentioned in schedule 4. Item 7, part 4.3 of schedule 4 of the Planning and Development Act lists “proposal involving land on the register of contaminated sites under the Environment Protection Act”. Therefore, any development proposal on land on the contaminated sites register, regardless of the proposal’s potential impact or whether it engages the contaminated land, must be assessed in the impact track and an environmental impact statement prepared, unless an environmental impact statement exemption applies.
An environmental impact statement is the highest level of impact assessment under the Planning and Development Act and it has become apparent that the regulatory burden associated with preparing an environmental impact statement may not always be appropriate for the relatively minor issues that can arise from consideration of a development proposal on a contaminated site. For example, a development proposal to erect a sign on a block containing contaminated land is automatically placed into the impact track by operation of the schedule 4 trigger and requires an environmental impact statement to be prepared. A sign is usually a very minor development and may not even impact on that part of the site which contains the contamination, and requiring an environmental impact statement in these circumstances may be an unnecessary regulatory burden.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video