Page 1238 - Week 04 - Wednesday, 3 April 2019
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
time? Do some of them lapse forever? Does the minister eventually get them done? I wonder: has the minister ever done any mathematics on what these delays actually cost the community, the building industry, the applicant who could be saddled with interest penalties, sunk cost and wasted effort in preparing their application?
Worse still, these impacts might never be recouped. Ultimately they will be recouped because they will be paid for by whoever is buying the property. They will be paid for in an increased market. This does not account for the personal strain and the health impacts on those applicants who were depending on a timely resolution or waiting on the construction of their dwelling.
The damage inflicted by these delays does not affect just the applicants alone. It reflects on the reputation, the credibility, the desirability of the ACT as a place to invest in. If our development administration process is perceived to be a major black hole then how do we sustain the confidence of business and industry to operate in the ACT? And what does that failure to maintain standards do for jobs and for industry development?
It does not end there, for the minister must be putting enormous pressure on his planning and DA processing staff to catch up or at least not fall further behind. The workplace must be nightmarish, with in-trays piling up, abusive phone calls from frustrated applicants and processing staff being urged to work harder and faster. I do hope staff are not being pushed to a point that affects their health and mental wellbeing. I wonder what the workplace is like in this area and I feel for those who are undoubtedly buckling under this strain, because it is not their fault.
We really do not know what is happening, and from this side of the chamber all we can do is ask the minister to tell us what is going on. To this end, the motion before us does in fact ask the minister to be a little more forthcoming with some detail on the DA assessment and processing areas. The detail is not onerous and will not only help him but also help both sides of the chamber to understand the situation. Surely the minister owes it to himself, his staff, the stakeholder industries, the reputation of the ACT and those who are bearing losses and stress to do something.
MS LE COUTEUR (Murrumbidgee) (10.12): I rise to speak on Mr Parton’s motion from the perspective of chair of the Standing Committee on Planning and Urban Renewal. I have to advise members that Mr Parton’s motion falls within the terms of reference of an inquiry that the planning and urban renewal committee is currently undertaking. The inquiry in question is into engagement with development application processes in the ACT. Mr Parton is a member of the committee and therefore aware of the inquiry. The terms of reference for the inquiry include the following at 2 d):
Processing times for Development Applications;
It also has “Any other relevant matters” as part of the committee inquiry.
The inquiry has received submissions and heard from witnesses. Several of the submissions addressed term of reference 2 d), including submission 29 by the Planning Institute of Australia, ACT Division, and submission 49 by the Property Council of Australia, ACT Division.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video