❓ Mr. Miles asks the Minister for Planning for an update on planning system reforms. The Minister details amendments to the Planning and Development Act 2005, specifically section 76, and its impact on local government planning scheme amendments.
AnsweredQoN 812Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
PLANNING
AND DEVELOPMENT ACT 2005 — PLANNING REFORM — REPEAL WEEK
812. Mr P.T. MILES to the
Minister for Planning:
Minister, given that this week is Repeal Week, and that
reform of the planning system has been a particular focus for this government,
can the minister please provide an update on how the reforms are delivering a
more consistent planning system across the state?
AND DEVELOPMENT ACT 2005 — PLANNING REFORM — REPEAL WEEK
812. Mr P.T. MILES to the
Minister for Planning:
Minister, given that this week is Repeal Week, and that
reform of the planning system has been a particular focus for this government,
can the minister please provide an update on how the reforms are delivering a
more consistent planning system across the state?
AnswerView source ↗
I thank the member for the question. It is certainly the case
that in the first term of government, we did make significant changes to
planning legislation and the planning system in this state to ensure that it is
more responsive to the contemporary needs of the state. Those members who were
here at the time would recall that significant amendments were made to the
Planning and Development Act in 2010. Those amendments came into effect almost
exactly three years ago, on 22 November 2010. Among other things, those
amendments included the amendment to section 76 of the act, which has enabled
the Minister for Planning to require that a local government initiate a
planning scheme amendment, whereas previously, at best, it was debatable
whether that power existed. That means that essentially there is an avenue of
appeal for applicants who believe they have a strong prima facie case for a scheme
amendment to be initiated to facilitate a particular development. They can come
to me as Minister for Planning, normally through the Department of Planning, or
in some cases they write to me directly, so that due consideration can be given
to establish whether there is a prima facie case. That has occurred on 14
occasions over the last three years since the section 76 process has been in
effect. The majority of these representations were made on the basis that local
governments had failed to initiate scheme amendments even though proper
planning grounds were considered to have existed.
Some of the local government areas in which this process has
been used and that come to mind include Stirling, Claremont, South Perth,
Exmouth and Port Hedland; so there is quite a geographical spread. Twelve
orders have been made to local governments to initiate the scheme amendment
process, and all of these have, as is required, been tabled in this house; and
two are currently being assessed by the Department of Planning prior to making
a recommendation to me as to whether the order should be given. Of the 12
orders that have been made, five amendments have been finalised and approved,
and seven are progressing through the normal scheme amendment process. One
other local government area that comes to mind is the City of Subiaco, and I
should mention that a significant amendment is currently being considered in
that area.
The reform to section 76 has meant that amendments that are
based on strong planning principles and that will deliver good planning
outcomes can now be given due consideration, whereas previously they could
effectively have been obstructed by local governments. One example of a case in
which the process has been used to good effect is in the Town of Claremont.
This is simply one example that I am choosing of a location within one
kilometre of the Claremont town centre and within 800 metres of the Loch Street
train station. The Town of Claremont made a decision not to initiate the
amendment. It was of the view that it needed to be considered in the context of
a broader planning scheme review, but there was a strong prima facie case for
the amendment to be considered, given that it was consistent with Directions
2031 and the principle of providing more accommodation closer to major public
transport routes. I am pleased that at the conclusion of the advertising
process, the Town of Claremont supported the amendment, and it has now been
adopted. I think this process is working well. It has been one of the very significant
changes to the planning system in Western Australia and is reflective of the
reform process that has been in place. A second phase of planning reform is
currently under consideration. A discussion paper is out for public comment.
That closes in about three weeks or so. I encourage anyone with a strong
interest in this area to consider that paper.
that in the first term of government, we did make significant changes to
planning legislation and the planning system in this state to ensure that it is
more responsive to the contemporary needs of the state. Those members who were
here at the time would recall that significant amendments were made to the
Planning and Development Act in 2010. Those amendments came into effect almost
exactly three years ago, on 22 November 2010. Among other things, those
amendments included the amendment to section 76 of the act, which has enabled
the Minister for Planning to require that a local government initiate a
planning scheme amendment, whereas previously, at best, it was debatable
whether that power existed. That means that essentially there is an avenue of
appeal for applicants who believe they have a strong prima facie case for a scheme
amendment to be initiated to facilitate a particular development. They can come
to me as Minister for Planning, normally through the Department of Planning, or
in some cases they write to me directly, so that due consideration can be given
to establish whether there is a prima facie case. That has occurred on 14
occasions over the last three years since the section 76 process has been in
effect. The majority of these representations were made on the basis that local
governments had failed to initiate scheme amendments even though proper
planning grounds were considered to have existed.
Some of the local government areas in which this process has
been used and that come to mind include Stirling, Claremont, South Perth,
Exmouth and Port Hedland; so there is quite a geographical spread. Twelve
orders have been made to local governments to initiate the scheme amendment
process, and all of these have, as is required, been tabled in this house; and
two are currently being assessed by the Department of Planning prior to making
a recommendation to me as to whether the order should be given. Of the 12
orders that have been made, five amendments have been finalised and approved,
and seven are progressing through the normal scheme amendment process. One
other local government area that comes to mind is the City of Subiaco, and I
should mention that a significant amendment is currently being considered in
that area.
The reform to section 76 has meant that amendments that are
based on strong planning principles and that will deliver good planning
outcomes can now be given due consideration, whereas previously they could
effectively have been obstructed by local governments. One example of a case in
which the process has been used to good effect is in the Town of Claremont.
This is simply one example that I am choosing of a location within one
kilometre of the Claremont town centre and within 800 metres of the Loch Street
train station. The Town of Claremont made a decision not to initiate the
amendment. It was of the view that it needed to be considered in the context of
a broader planning scheme review, but there was a strong prima facie case for
the amendment to be considered, given that it was consistent with Directions
2031 and the principle of providing more accommodation closer to major public
transport routes. I am pleased that at the conclusion of the advertising
process, the Town of Claremont supported the amendment, and it has now been
adopted. I think this process is working well. It has been one of the very significant
changes to the planning system in Western Australia and is reflective of the
reform process that has been in place. A second phase of planning reform is
currently under consideration. A discussion paper is out for public comment.
That closes in about three weeks or so. I encourage anyone with a strong
interest in this area to consider that paper.
Explore WA Government Data
Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.
Explore more
Government Gazette
Appointments, regulatory notices, planning changes.
Hansard
Debates, questions, speeches and sentiment.
Tabled Papers
Reports and documents tabled in Parliament.
Committees
Committee profiles and recent reports.
Regulations
Subsidiary legislation with filters and summaries.
Bills
Proposed laws and parliamentary progress.
Acts
Current WA legislation and summaries.
Explanatory Memoranda
Bills with EMs (text/PDF) available.
Members
MP profiles, party breakdown and rankings.
Pollie Rankings
Data-driven rankings across 19 categories.
Amendment Chains
Track how schemes and regulations evolve over time.