Page 723 - Week 05 - Wednesday, 5 July 1989
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
interest in the way that the land is used and what the tenants and the lessees do to it. But clearly there is a wide community concern that planning decisions be right, that allocations for land for various uses be right and that they be consistent with the things that we like to see in this city.
Stemming from that there is clearly a need to set up a procedure so that citizens individually or community groups can appeal if in their view a particular piece of land is not being used for an appropriate purpose, if an administrative decision concerning the allocation of land for a certain use is inappropriate or unacceptable. I am no lawyer, but I understand that the only recourse for somebody who believes that there has been a wrong decision is to the ACT Supreme Court. It is a lengthy process and, as my colleague Mr Collaery pointed out, the Supreme Court has a list of cases on its hands that will probably consume the court's time for the next 12 months, with the resources it has.
If you want to appeal against an administrative decision concerning land use and you have recourse to the court, first of all it is going to take you a long time to get a decision, and by the time you do so it may be too late anyway. Secondly, it will cost you some money, and most people and individuals who feel aggrieved about an administrative decision of this kind simply do not have the financial resources to prosecute their appeal through the court system.
I think it is fair to say that we ought to have an appeal system containing a number of characteristics. It has to be accessible to all people who feel that they have a grievance or a complaint. It has to be open so that people can know what is going on within the system. It has to be simple. It cannot be bound up with legalistic processes and procedures such that it frightens the average citizen away. People have to be able to understand what is happening. Finally, it has to be responsive. Such a system has to be able to act quickly, take a matter under advisement, and come back with a decision that either supports the original administrative decision or upsets it.
That, in my view, can only be done by an appeals board or tribunal or committee that is administrative in nature and not legal. The minute you start binding such an organisation with legal procedures and the trappings of legal office, then you will complicate it. I submit that you will put it beyond the reach of the average citizens, who more often than not are frightened away, even though they may believe that they have a genuine and legitimate complaint or a genuine case to put. They tend to be frightened away by legalistic procedures. I agree that we need to examine a method by which grievances, complaints, criticisms can be easily and simply heard in a forum that is understandable to the average citizen who may want to have some matter resolved.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .