Page 3015 - Week 09 - Thursday, 21 September 2006
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Developing Cities, despite significant improvements in the past decade, few people think that the results of development assessment reflect the billions of dollars invested in those processes. Planning systems have tried to keep up with increasingly complex expectations by adding confusing layers of processes which have created uncertainty, inconsistency and complexity in the assessment process.
As a fundamental piece of government machinery, the development assessment system influences the economic vibrancy, environmental enhancement and wellbeing of present and future communities in all Australian jurisdictions. The efficiency, effectiveness and economy of the development assessment system is underpinned by five fundamental components. I will provide a brief overview of these.
The first component is the legislation and guidelines mandating assessment criteria. The legislation and accompanying guidance material are the principal policy documents at the heart of any planning and land system. The Auditor-General found that the legislation governing the development assessment process was very complex, with many layers of information impacting on the process, such as regulations, planning guidelines, lease requirements, land use policies, the requirements of other agencies, objection processes and the principles of ecologically sustainable development.
Many submissions to the committee highlighted concerns around the complexity of laws, regulations, planning rules, plans, guidelines and government policy requirements that often apply to development assessment. The committee is of the view that the complexity of the current legislation governing the development assessment process generates uncertainty which may inhibit development, add to proponent and community costs, and exacerbate delays in assessment.
The second component is the assessment processes of administering assessment criteria. Whatever the goals of the principal policy documents governing development assessment, the assessment processes have to work efficiently. Once government has approved the detailed policies—that is, the planning, heritage, environmental, social and economic criteria for assessing development—assessment processes are effective only if the policies are applied expertly, accurately and efficiently every time.
The Auditor-General found that development assessment processes were very complex to administer and use. In order to make the necessary efficiency and timeliness gains, the audit recommended that the authority should focus on actions such as improving documentation and records management, improving monitoring and reporting, and particularly improving and integrating the referrals process. Most submissions and witnesses at public hearings expressed concern regarding the complexity, consistency and efficiency of development assessment processes. This included reservations about quality control, the robustness of decision making and the integration of referrals in the development assessment process.
The third component is the organisational culture of the assessment authority. Effective organisational performance relies on systems and people working together. The hard systems, processes and data are inseparable from the soft aspects, such as culture, leadership and learning. One cannot work without the other. The committee is of the view that the assessing authority’s organisational culture influences the efficiency, effectiveness and economy of the development assessment system. Throughout its
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .