HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Subject Index
Legislative Council - Fifty-Second Parliament, First Session (52-1)
2011-03-24 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

Question Time

GAWLER COUNCIL

The Hon. D.W. RIDGWAY (Leader of the Opposition) (14:21): I seek leave to make a brief explanation before asking the Minister for State/Local Government Relations and Planning, questions, fortuitously, about the Town of Gawler v Minister for Urban Development and Planning.

Leave granted.

The Hon. D.W. RIDGWAY: As members would be aware, on 25 February this year His Honour Justice Duggan handed down a judgement in the matter of the Town of Gawler v Minister for Urban Development and Planning. Notwithstanding the matter being dismissed, in my view, the judgement outlines some significant problems with the Development Act and the DPA process. My questions are:

1. Has the minister read the judgement?

2. Is the minister aware that, on 24 February 2009, before the DPA was completed by the Department of Planning and Local Government and eight months before its release for public consultation, the Town of Gawler wrote to the former minister for urban development and planning to express its concern about the process?

3. Is the minister comfortable with local government (that is, the responsible planning body) being frozen out of the DPA process when there was clearly an opportunity to work with them on the DPA?

4. Does the minister believe that the lukewarm description by the independent planning officer within the Department of Planning and Local Government towards the proponent's retail study as 'defensible' is the benchmark for future planning decisions involving large-scale retail floor space?

5. Notwithstanding the judgement, does the minister believe that section 24(1)(g) of the Development Act, which has been interpreted to allow the minister to have formed an opinion of the DPA prior to its release for public consultation, puts the cart before the horse?

6. Does the minister believe that section 26(8)(b) of the Development Act, which permits the minister to alter a DPA and then approve the alteration without consultation, undermines the proposal?

The Hon. P. Holloway interjecting:

The Hon. D.W. RIDGWAY: You have already been disgraced today with a citizen's right of reply. My questions continue:

7. Given these obvious failings, will the government now seek a wideranging review of the Development Act in order to restore faith in the planning system?

The PRESIDENT: The minister can answer the question and the number of supplementaries that come with it if he wants.

The Hon. B.V. FINNIGAN (Minister for Industrial Relations, Minister for State/Local Government Relations, Minister for Gambling) (14:23): Yes, thank you, Mr President. I thank the Leader of the Opposition for that thorough question, which was really, I think, seven questions in one. In relation to the Gawler matters, I will refer those to my colleague the Deputy Premier in another place and bring back a response. However, I would remind the house that Justice Duggan found no error in the decisions of the former minister (Hon. Mr Holloway) regarding the DPA.

Many of the questions the Hon. Mr Ridgway asked went to the development legislation and whether it is sufficient. Well, as I understand it, we spend a third of our time in this place talking about the great ideas of honourable members opposite. So, if he thinks that there is a problem with the Development Act, he can do something about it and move a bill in this house.

The PRESIDENT: A further supplementary from the Hon. Mr Ridgway.

PARLIAMENTARY BUSINESS
MEMBERS
GET INVOLVED
ABOUT PARLIAMENT
VISIT
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL
HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY
CONTACT