❓ Question regarding a perceived decline in planning approvals and staffing levels within the Office of Land and Housing Supply. The Minister refutes claims of government inaction, attributing the decline to reduced demand and financing difficulties.
AnsweredQoN 105Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
PLANNING APPROVALS
105. Mrs G.J. GODFREY to the Minister for Planning:
Mr Speaker —
Mr D.A. Templeman interjected.
The SPEAKER :
Member for Mandurah!
Mrs G.J. GODFREY :
I refer to the member for West Swan's statement to the house last week
that planning approvals were down and that the Office of Land and Housing
Supply had no staff. With this in mind, can the minister please clarify the
state's position in relation to land approvals?
105. Mrs G.J. GODFREY to the Minister for Planning:
Mr Speaker —
Mr D.A. Templeman interjected.
The SPEAKER :
Member for Mandurah!
Mrs G.J. GODFREY :
I refer to the member for West Swan's statement to the house last week
that planning approvals were down and that the Office of Land and Housing
Supply had no staff. With this in mind, can the minister please clarify the
state's position in relation to land approvals?
AnswerView source ↗
I thank the member for the question. The issue of
availability of land for residential developments, whether it be in greenfield
sites or for urban infill projects, is certainly an important one. I was
interested in the comments made by the member for West Swan last week. She
accurately reflected the fact that the number of approvals or titles granted
for new lots in Western Australia over the last four years has been at a lower
rate than was the case in the previous two or three years. That is correct. What
is completely incorrect is her analysis of the reasons. She intimated or
suggested that the reduction in the number of approvals has been a result of
lack of government action or because of some government actions that have
slowed down the process.
Mr M. McGowan : You're
just the government.
Mr J.H.D. DAY : For
the benefit of the Leader of the Opposition, who has made similar comments in
the past, and the member for West Swan and anybody else who might be
interested, the reason is that there has been a reduced demand over the last
four years from buyers of land, and normally when there is reduced demand,
suppliers who have the ability to do so reduce their production. They have also
been operating in a situation of reduced availability of finance following the
global financial crisis. So it has been more difficult for development
companies to obtain access to finance, and it has also been harder in some
cases for potential buyers of lots to obtain finance. So that is the reason
there has been a reduced number of actual lots produced over the last four
years or so.
To be more precise, in 2006–07, there were 6 255
applications for final approval. In 2011–12, the Planning Commission
received 2 942 applications to create the lots that were created. Approximately
42 000 lots were created in 2006–07 and about 28 000 lots were created
in 2011–12. The reduced number of applications reflects the reduced
demand and the reduced production by development companies. Nevertheless, the
number of conditionally approved lots has remained fairly static. In fact, at
the end of the 2005–06 financial year, the total stock of conditionally
approved lots—these are ones that will not in all cases be actually
created, but it is an important indicator of land availability—was 62 605.
I am advised that over the last four years, there have been 72 000 lots with
conditional approval—in other words, available for development.
I also advise that the performance of the Department of
Planning in recent years has improved substantially. In 2008–09, only
56 per cent of subdivision applications were processed within the target period
of 90 days. This has now improved to 79 per cent in 2011–12, and 99 per
cent of applications for final subdivision clearance were determined within the
required 30 days. So the performance and output of the Department of Planning
has improved substantially over the last three years. That also demonstrates
that the comments of the member for West Swan are simply not borne out by the
evidence.
I also advise that the number of amendments to the Perth
metropolitan and Peel region schemes that have been dealt with by the
department, and therefore ultimately by me as Minister for Planning, has
increased from 17 in 2007–08 to 34 in 2011–12. In the Perth,
Peel and Bunbury regions, in 2010, 190 hectares of urban-zoned land was added,
and, in 2011, 400 hectares of land was added. So there is a substantial amount
of land available for residential development. I hope that members now
understand that the analysis presented by the member for West Swan is simply
not accurate.
In relation to the Office of Land and Housing Supply and the
statement that there are no staff in that office, that is not correct. There
are in fact two dedicated staff members on contract. They have substantial
experience and they are playing a very important role in providing information
and also facilitating land development, particularly residential land
development, in Western Australia. As I said, there are two dedicated staff
within that office, and they are working very effectively.
availability of land for residential developments, whether it be in greenfield
sites or for urban infill projects, is certainly an important one. I was
interested in the comments made by the member for West Swan last week. She
accurately reflected the fact that the number of approvals or titles granted
for new lots in Western Australia over the last four years has been at a lower
rate than was the case in the previous two or three years. That is correct. What
is completely incorrect is her analysis of the reasons. She intimated or
suggested that the reduction in the number of approvals has been a result of
lack of government action or because of some government actions that have
slowed down the process.
Mr M. McGowan : You're
just the government.
Mr J.H.D. DAY : For
the benefit of the Leader of the Opposition, who has made similar comments in
the past, and the member for West Swan and anybody else who might be
interested, the reason is that there has been a reduced demand over the last
four years from buyers of land, and normally when there is reduced demand,
suppliers who have the ability to do so reduce their production. They have also
been operating in a situation of reduced availability of finance following the
global financial crisis. So it has been more difficult for development
companies to obtain access to finance, and it has also been harder in some
cases for potential buyers of lots to obtain finance. So that is the reason
there has been a reduced number of actual lots produced over the last four
years or so.
To be more precise, in 2006–07, there were 6 255
applications for final approval. In 2011–12, the Planning Commission
received 2 942 applications to create the lots that were created. Approximately
42 000 lots were created in 2006–07 and about 28 000 lots were created
in 2011–12. The reduced number of applications reflects the reduced
demand and the reduced production by development companies. Nevertheless, the
number of conditionally approved lots has remained fairly static. In fact, at
the end of the 2005–06 financial year, the total stock of conditionally
approved lots—these are ones that will not in all cases be actually
created, but it is an important indicator of land availability—was 62 605.
I am advised that over the last four years, there have been 72 000 lots with
conditional approval—in other words, available for development.
I also advise that the performance of the Department of
Planning in recent years has improved substantially. In 2008–09, only
56 per cent of subdivision applications were processed within the target period
of 90 days. This has now improved to 79 per cent in 2011–12, and 99 per
cent of applications for final subdivision clearance were determined within the
required 30 days. So the performance and output of the Department of Planning
has improved substantially over the last three years. That also demonstrates
that the comments of the member for West Swan are simply not borne out by the
evidence.
I also advise that the number of amendments to the Perth
metropolitan and Peel region schemes that have been dealt with by the
department, and therefore ultimately by me as Minister for Planning, has
increased from 17 in 2007–08 to 34 in 2011–12. In the Perth,
Peel and Bunbury regions, in 2010, 190 hectares of urban-zoned land was added,
and, in 2011, 400 hectares of land was added. So there is a substantial amount
of land available for residential development. I hope that members now
understand that the analysis presented by the member for West Swan is simply
not accurate.
In relation to the Office of Land and Housing Supply and the
statement that there are no staff in that office, that is not correct. There
are in fact two dedicated staff members on contract. They have substantial
experience and they are playing a very important role in providing information
and also facilitating land development, particularly residential land
development, in Western Australia. As I said, there are two dedicated staff
within that office, and they are working very effectively.
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.