Page 353 - Week 02 - Tuesday, 14 February 2017
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
Amendment agreed to.
Bill, as a whole, as amended, agreed to.
Bill, as amended, agreed to.
Planning, Building and Environment Legislation Amendment Bill 2016 (No 2)
Debate resumed from 15 December 2016, on motion by Mr Gentleman:
That this bill be agreed to in principle.
MS LAWDER (Brindabella) (11.24): The opposition will support the Planning, Building and Environment Legislation Amendment Bill 2016 (No 2). This bill is the latest in a series of omnibus bills in the planning, building and environment space and contains minor policy amendments to a number of regulations and pieces of legislation, including the Climate Change and Greenhouse Gas Reduction Act 2010, the Planning and Development Regulation 2008 and the Utilities (Technical Regulation) Act 2014.
The bill also proposes a number of technical and editorial amendments to legislation, including the Environment Protection Act 1997, the Nature Conservation Act 2014, the Nature Conservation Regulation 2015, the Planning and Development Act 2007, the Planning and Development Regulation 2008, and the Utilities (Technical Regulation) Act 2014.
Many of the amendments in this bill are intended to be minor and remove administrative complications, such as removing section 10 of the Climate Change and Greenhouse Gas Reduction Act 2010 because energy efficiency targets are now provided for in the Energy Efficiency (Cost of Living) Improvement Act 2012.
There is also a change to the Planning and Development Regulation 2008 to ensure consultation is required for developments over 7,000 square metres for one or more than one building. Previously these had only needed consultation if a single building over 5,000 square metres was proposed. Under this change community consultation will now be required prior to a development application being lodged.
I foreshadow that on Thursday I will be moving a motion referring a question about minor and technical amendments to the Administration and Procedure Committee. In this instance we are not opposed to this change but it brought to mind instances where changes that come through the PBELABs and SLABs, which are intended to be minor and non-controversial, in some cases have a little more meat on their bones. We will be seeking guidance from the admin and procedures committee as to what principles may be applied to determine which ones are minor and non-controversial. That is coming up on Thursday and, as I said, we are not opposed to this change.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video