Bulletin (PDF 18.3 MB) - City of Armadale

Information BulletinInformation Items from the Development Services DirectoratePageD-6INFORMATION ITEM – COMMENTS ON ASPECTS OF THE APPROVALS ANDRELATED REFORMS (PLANNING) ACTAll things considered; the small numbers of DAP applications, the additional costs, theadministrative nightmare associated with running DAPs and the difficulty of attracting crediblemembers prepared to subject themselves to the promised training regimen – I suspect the wholething will fall in a heap if they ever get up next year. If they do, possibly there will be an attempt topin the failure on local government’s negative attitude. So, the warning needs to be clearlyreiterated, as it was in numerous submissions, it is patently obvious that DAPs will not deliver anyof the purported benefits and will be detrimental to approval timeframes, increase costs toapplicants and further marginalise community interests.Amendments to Section 76The second matter I would like to comment on is the manner in which an amendment to S. 76 toradically undermine the autonomy of local government by empowering the Minister to requirecouncils to amend their schemes, became law.The Approvals and Related Reforms (Planning) Bill was introduced into Parliament and secondread on 18 th November 2009. Neither the legislation, the Explanatory Memorandum or theMinister’s speech made any reference to amending section 76.The Bill was debated on 4 th May 2010 between 4 and 6pm then adjourned for dinner. Debatereconvened at 7 and by 9.30pm all members had had their say on the Bill. Then the Minister JohnDay got up to reply noting that the contributions had been “overwhelmingly constructive and I verymuch welcome the opposition’s support for the bill.” Then the Minister advised that he would putforward eight amendments. The first three amendments related to DAPs (reflecting negotiationswhich had taken place with the parties). Four required the Minister to advise Parliament of anyrequired scheme amendment by virtue of an SPP, five deleted a provision to give quicker approvalto proposals within the Nation Building and Jobs plan and six related to model scheme textprovisions. Eight was to correct a typo. All agreed minor.Leaving seven. This was described as “the revision of the enabling power for general regulations toimplement model scheme text review recommendations” to amend section 76 “to clarify that theexisting power of the Minister under that section to direct a local government to prepare a localplanning scheme extends to scheme amendments.” This would have sounded quite innocuous,particularly after 10pm, to the members. The clause was passed in a block without debate two dayslater, fully passed the Lower House on 18 th May and the Upper House on 1 st July 2010.So what needed clarification? For decades it has been clearly understood by everyone in local andstate government that a Minister had no power to require a local government to amend its scheme.Whenever it had been suggested, as indeed the development industry had in the past, thegovernment had rapidly backed off in the face of community backlash.This apparent slight of hand (which even kept secret from key DoP officers) was queried with theDirector General when it came to light in September 2010. He advised that it had resulted from asuggestion in the Review of the Town Planning Regulations and MST May 2009 discussion paperand the subsequent Report on Submissions.