<!--The Official Report of Parliamentary Debates (Hansard) of the Legislative Council and the House of Assembly of the Parliament of South Australia are covered by parliamentary privilege. Republication by others is not afforded the same protection and may result in exposure to legal liability if the material is defamatory. You may copy and make use of excerpts of proceedings where (1) you attribute the Parliament as the source, (2) you assume the risk of liability if the manner of your use is defamatory, (3) you do not use the material for the purpose of advertising, satire or ridicule, or to misrepresent members of Parliament, and (4) your use of the extracts is fair, accurate and not misleading. Copyright in the Official Report of Parliamentary Debates is held by the Attorney-General of South Australia.-->
<hansard id="" tocId="" xml:lang="EN-AU" schemaVersion="1.0" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:xml="http://www.w3.org/XML/1998/namespace" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2007/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xsi:noNamespaceSchemaLocation="hansard_1_0.xsd">
  <name>Legislative Council</name>
  <date date="2008-04-29" />
  <sessionName>Fifty-First Parliament, Second Session (51-2)</sessionName>
  <parliamentNum>51</parliamentNum>
  <sessionNum>2</sessionNum>
  <parliamentName>Parliament of South Australia</parliamentName>
  <house>Legislative Council</house>
  <venue></venue>
  <reviewStage>published</reviewStage>
  <startPage num="2441" />
  <endPage num="2482" />
  <dateModified time="2022-08-06T14:30:00+00:00" />
  <proceeding continued="true">
    <name>Question Time</name>
    <subject>
      <name>Better Development Plans</name>
      <text id="2008042901cf8fd768e94cfab0000256">
        <heading>BETTER DEVELOPMENT PLANS</heading>
      </text>
      <talker role="member" id="3130" kind="question">
        <name>The Hon. M. PARNELL</name>
        <house>Legislative Council</house>
        <questions>
          <question date="2008-04-29">
            <name>BETTER DEVELOPMENT PLANS</name>
          </question>
        </questions>
        <startTime time="2008-04-29T15:15:00" />
        <text id="2008042901cf8fd768e94cfab0000257">
          <timeStamp time="2008-04-29T15:15:00" />
          <by role="member" id="3130">The Hon. M. PARNELL (15:15): </by> By way of supplementary question, as well as improving consistency between the council plans, is it also the government's objective to use the planning policy library and the better development plan modules to reduce the number of categories 2 and 3 applications and thereby increase the number of category 1 applications that do not have to go through public consultation?</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="574" kind="answer">
        <name>The Hon. P. HOLLOWAY</name>
        <house>Legislative Council</house>
        <electorate id="">Minister for Police, Minister for Mineral Resources Development, Minister for Urban Development and Planning</electorate>
        <questions>
          <question date="2008-04-29">
            <name>BETTER DEVELOPMENT PLANS</name>
          </question>
        </questions>
        <startTime time="2008-04-29T15:15:00" />
        <page num="2455" />
        <text id="2008042901cf8fd768e94cfab0000258">
          <timeStamp time="2008-04-29T15:15:00" />
          <by role="member" id="574">The Hon. P. HOLLOWAY (Minister for Police, Minister for Mineral Resources Development, Minister for Urban Development and Planning) (15:15): </by> The answer to that would really be, I guess, a subjective judgment that someone would make on the development processes, but the main purpose is to make it consistent. I have the power under the act to insist on the better development plan format, and we certainly encourage councils to comply with that, but I have not had cause to use those particular powers to date.</text>
        <text id="2008042901cf8fd768e94cfab0000259">In relation to the categorisation of development, that comes back to the original question asked by the Hon. Sandra Kanck. As I said, I do not intend to comment on what is in the planning review until it is released, other than to say that obviously a simplification of the process is one of the main objectives. But, to try to reduce that to a particular categorisation would be to grossly oversimplify the objectives of that review, and I suggest that honourable members wait until that is released. They will not have to wait too much longer.</text>
      </talker>
    </subject>
  </proceeding>
</hansard>