The Gutwein Government’s new planning process to assess development proposals in Tasmania  is expected to be tabled in Parliament this week, with a House of Assembly vote on the  developer-friendly approval process possible as early as Thursday. 

While changes to the draft bill, released for public consultation during the COVID lockdown, are  expected in the final incarnation of the bill, community groups do not expect that fundamental  concerns will be addressed and have been imploring Labor representatives to ‘put people first’  and vote against it. See here. 

“We need a balanced approach in development assessment processes which meaningfully  engages the public and works for both the community and developers,” said Sophie  Underwood, State Coordinator of Planning Matters Alliance Tasmania, a collaboration of almost  70 community groups from across Tasmania. 

“The proposed process will prioritise private commercial development over people and create  division and conflict across the community, impeding social license. 

Critical concerns with the Major Projects Bill include: 

• Eligibility criteria are vague and open – almost any large project could be declared a Major Project and responsibility for this decision rests solely with the Minister; • All current controversial projects across Tasmania could foreseeably be pulled into this process; 
• Limited community consultation and participation –the community has only 28 days to assess, respond to, engage expert help, and be ready to make both written and oral submissions to any major project assessment process; 
• There are other limits on meaningful public participation in the assessment process – the public only gets to make input when the panel has released its preliminary decision (draft assessment report) which is contrary to the normal  local council process and very unfair. The public are at a disadvantage as they  must convince the panel to change its mind.
• No appeal rights – the community will be unable to appeal the decision to approve a major project, removing a basic democratic right for those projects that would normally be assessed by councils. Legal review can only be taken to the Supreme Court on judicial  review which are generally on procedural grounds, not on substance (e.g. the height of a  building). 
• Allows projects to be removed from the normal local council planning assessment – this can occur mid-way through a planning assessment or after the project has been rejected;
• Displaces existing and trusted Projects of State Significance (POSS) process; • Removes parliamentary oversight – approval of large and complex projects through this process will have no parliamentary sign off, unlike the Projects of State Significance process. 

“This process removes any oversight of the Parliament and diminishes the rights of people and  communities to be meaningfully involved in development decisions. It is anti-democratic and  we urge all parliamentarians to vote it down.”