Local Government Association of Tasmania votes against DAPs.

At the meeting of the Local Government Association of Tasmania all 29 local governments voted in support of a motion that “Local Government rejects the DAP legislation in its current form”. The full motion was

That LGAT:

1. informs the State government that Local Government rejects the DAP legislation in its current form.
2. The Local Government sector is extremely disappointed by the governments approach to the consultation on this Bill.
3. Remains open to professional consultation and collaboration with the parliament

Planning Matters Alliance Tasmania (PMAT) and Tasmanian Conservation Trust (TCT) welcome the LGAT’s unanimous decision and acknowledge the many shared concerns about the controversial DAP legislation.

Lower House of State Parliament suspends standing orders to hasten DAPs debate

At the same time as Local Government were debating their motion the Lower House of the state parliament voted to suspend standing orders to enable the government to bring on debate on the DAP legislation today, reducing the time members of parliament have to consider it.

The PMAT and TCT condemn the Liberal and Labor parties for wanting to rush the debate and avoid full scrutiny of this controversial legislation before the Local Government sector had voted on it.

The PMAT State Director, Sophie Underwood stated that: “Communities across Tasmania have been badly let down by Labor and Liberal parties wanting to rush the parliamentary debate and avoid full scrutiny of the controversial DAP legislation. With all 29 Local Governments stating their opposition to the DAPs legislation the Labor and Liberal Parties should now vote against the DAPs”.

The TCT CEO Peter McGlone stated that: “It seems like the state government doesn’t care about how impractical and unpopular its DAPs legislation is, it just wants a big political fight, and now they have one with all 29 Local Governments opposing DAPs.”

Public submissions

The PMAT reviewed all the submissions because the state government had failed to do so. Out of 482 submissions received on the Draft DAP legislation 444 submissions (92%) were opposed to the creation of DAPs.

PMAT State Director Sophie Underwood stated that “It is greatly concerning that the state government tabled the final bill in parliament only five business days after receiving these submissions. The government ignored almost all recommendations made in the submissions”.

Submissions by Local Government

The TCT reviewed all the submissions made by Local Governments on the Draft DAP legislation. Out of 18 submissions received 14 Local Governments stated opposition or were leaning toward opposition to the DAP bill. One council supported the bill and three did not indicate a clear position.

TCT CEO Peter McGlone stated that “Today’s LGAT decision should be no surprise to the state government after it received overwhelming opposition through the submission process”.

Tasmanian Planning Commission voices concerns about DAPs legislation

In a move that may be unprecedented the Tasmanian Planning Commission (submission number 343) made a strong submission on the Draft DAP legislation, pointing out a long list of concerns and making numerous recommendations for amendments.

Having reviewed the Tasmanian Planning Commission submission and confirmed that the tabled legislation has not been amended to address their concerns, TCT CEO Peter McGlone stated that: “The Tasmanian Planning Commission submission points out how totally unworkable the DAP legislation will be, an incredible statement because the Planning Commission will be responsible for administering the DAPs”.

Key concerns and suggested amendments by the Tasmanian Planning Commission:

– Planning scheme amendments: the Planning Commission recommended a major amendment so that councils and not the DAPs assess proposals for planning scheme amendments and that DAPs would only make the final determination.

– Heritage: the Planning Commission raises concerns that places on Tasmanian Heritage register are at “very high risk being used or developed inappropriately” and that “the Heritage Act does not apply” to DAP assessments.

–DAP members not protected from liability: The Planning Commission says they are concerned that the Tasmanian Planning Commission Act 1997 would not apply to DAPs the same way they apply to panels delegated under s.8 of the Commission Act and that “DAP members are not protected from immunity and liability as afforded to Commission delegates under s.13 and s.14 Commission Act”. They make recommendations for amendment to the Draft DAP bill and suggest changes to the Commission Act.

– Insufficient staff in TPC: Concerns that the TPC won’t have sufficient staff with appropriate skills and recommends that the commencement date is delayed to ensure the Commission is prepared.

– Valuation of proposed developments: Not clear who calculates the value of a development and concerned that the Commission could be challenged on valuation and asks, “would it invalidate the process?”. Recommends regulations to establish thresholds subject to annual indexation. Also suggests “Evidence of the costs of works should be provided by a suitably qualified person such as a quantity surveyor”.

– Key terms not defined: Concerned about language used e.g. ‘significant’, ‘controversial’, ‘conflict of interest’ and says “not clear how the Minister may interpret this”. Recommends amendments so that the Ministers have guidelines or criteria.

– Expanded role for planning authorities: Suggest that “The planning authority should be given the opportunity to recommend that a permit not be granted…”.