ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT (CONTRIBUTIONS PLANS) AMENDMENT BILL
Second Reading
Debate resumed from 17th November.
The Hon. DELCIA KITE [10.14]: The introduction of legislation by the Wran Government in 1979 to ensure that local ratepayers did not bear the burden of the cost of providing public services and amenities as a result of development is a tribute to people like Jack Mundey and Professor Pat Troy, who worked closely with the Wran Government. The land co-ordination unit set up in 1979 by the then Deputy Premier and Minister for Public Works, Jack Ferguson, ensured that government instrumentalities set out the criteria for infrastructure and government services to precede, for the first time, the development of new estates. This critical change in government policy is enshrined in section 94 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. It is with a great deal of regret that I note in the Minister's explanatory comments that the Simpson report on the commission of inquiry into the operations and practices associated with contributions under section 94 revealed that some councils - not controlled by Labor councillors, I might add - have not acted responsibly in recording and monitoring section 94 contributions by developers.
Enlightened councils have, in fact, already adopted the sorts of contribution plans as proposed by this bill, and have been totally accountable for the manner in which funds have been managed. In the case of very large developments which may be subject to delays or challenges in the Land and Environment Court, particular problems have occurred which may not be within a growth centre but could be classified as a designated area. I am concerned that the Minister or director must have regard to any relevant
Page 9139
contributions plan, but are not bound by such plans. I wholeheartedly agree that any money received as a consequence of any such condition must be used within a reasonable time for the purpose for which it is levied. However, I would be pleased to hear from the Minister in his reply as to what circumstances would apply to invoke his powers under Section 94AA (5) in relation to which he may impose a condition referred to in section 94, even though it is not of a kind allowed by, or in accordance with, a contribution plan, particularly as section 94AB (3) states that "a council must not approve a contributions plan that is inconsistent with any direction given to it under section 94A". The major objective of the bill - to obtain accountability, both public and financial, of local councils - cannot be argued. However, in redefining councils' powers it is essential that local community interests are not overruled by any large overseas or local development lobby seeking ministerial intervention to avoid the contributions considered relevant by that community under Section 94AB. On the understanding that the Minister can adequately address these concerns, the Opposition supports the bill.
The Hon. R. S. L. JONES [10.18]: The Australian Democrats support this legislation, which will allow councils an additional six months to organise their plans for their section 94 works. This is brief and straightforward legislation. I remind honourable members once again of the extremely high cost involved in providing services for land subdivided by developers - up to $70,000 a block in unrecoverable costs, especially in the Sydney region. It would be advantageous if some of that cost, which the community has to incur over a period of time, were recovered at the time the blocks were subdivided and sold. I hope that these plans will regularise the purposes for which section 94 contributions are collected, and will be collected appropriately, and that they will not be put into general revenue, as has happened previously, apparently. The Australia Democrats support the bill.
The Hon. R. J. WEBSTER (Minister for Planning, and Minister for Housing) [10.19], in reply: I appreciate the comments made by the Hon. Delcia Kite. However, I wish to clarify a couple of matters to which she referred. The Minister is not able to make a contribution where the Minister has consent authority, which is the case in some instances such as the city west project. The Minister will determine the level of that part of the contribution plan determined by council and pass it on to the council. There is not a problem there. I thank the Hon. R. S. L. Jones for his comments. I commend the bill to the House.
Motion agreed to.
Bill read a second time and passed through remaining stages.