Governing the City State - Chief Minister and Treasury Directorate ...

• conditional approvals requiring the applicant to go through further separate processes togain clearances on matters identified by referral agencies.Another contributor to the Review noted:In many respects, the agencies seem to be working in almost opposite directions not assistingother agencies in achieving Cabinet directives. A clear example of this is with the issuing ofhousing affordability and our chronic shortage of residential land in the ACT. While theGovernment has publicly made it clear that land supply and housing affordability are keypolicy outcomes, there has lacked for some time any co-ordinated strategy across the variousagencies to deliver this outcome …Reducing the number of agencies and Ministers responsible for this important aspect ofgovernment, should be a key goal in this review.Ultimately, developers will make – properly – commercial decisions about what and when tobring projects to the market. While it is in keeping with the obligations of public servantsunder section 9 of the Public Sector Management Act 2004 for officials to, “in dealing withmembers of the public, make all reasonable efforts to assist them to understand theirentitlements under the territory laws and to understand any requirements that they are obligedto satisfy under those laws”, ensure developers know what is, and is not permitted, it is notthe role of those officials to tell developers what to build.The greatest frustrations expressed to the Review related to experiences where developersbecome caught in disagreements between elements of the ACTPS. While those elementseach have a legitimate role to play, they must play those roles in a coordinated, consistent andcoherent way that accords with expressed government policies and priorities. Particularlyharsh criticism was reserved for circumstances where developers were engaged in jointventures with the LDA and still encountered resistance from other elements of the ACTPS.There was praise from the industry for processes instituted by ACTPLA to facilitate meetingswith relevant agencies in the process of finalising Development Applications, but a sense offrustration that positions advanced in that context are not followed through consistently.An issue that emerged in consultations was the perceived inconsistency between tenderdocuments for englobo land sales against which winning bids had been determined andsubsequent approval and decision making processes to actually deliver what had beentendered for. While presented as a failing of coordination of implementation, this is, in factevidence of a failure of coordination and alignment much earlier in the process.A common solution proffered to the Review for overcoming expressed frustrations in thefuture was the instigation of more formal mechanisms to facilitate sustainable and sounddevelopment outcomes and cut through red tape or inconsistent decision making. Onecontributor suggested “the establishment of a high level group to oversee the delivery ofmajor territory infrastructure, other capital works projects and critical new private sectorprojects”:Administrative Arrangements Changes: 191