eCouncillor has been working for the past few days upsetting Planning Minister Frank Sartor's apple cart as he works to take all developments in NSW. Sartor's intention in the original amendment to the City of Sydney Act was to make all 4 government appointees (of the 7 Central Sydney Planning Committee members) his total control to appoint. We managed to make that a little more difficult for him.
Thanks go to Liberal Parliamentarians Don Harwin MLC and Greg Pearce MLC (as well as Shadow Minister Chris Hartcher) for supporting the campaign.
For those interested some background note are included at the bottom of the Hansard extract for information.
-----Original Message-----From: Shayne Mallard Sent: Thursday, 23 November 2006 3:15 PMSubject: Report - Hansard Legislative Council - CSPC amendments
Dear Councillors
Following from the Council motion on Monday night, John McInerney and I have worked tirelessly over the past few days to highlight and if possible change the amendments to the membership of the CSPC. Last night the Bill went through the Legislative Council and I am pleased to inform you that as a result of the pressure the Council, Institute of Architects, Planning Institute and others have applied to the Minister over the proposed changes that a compromise was offered via a government initiated amendment moved by Fred Nile MLC being -
((3) At least one of the senior State government employees appointed under subsection (1) (c) must be either the Director-General of the Department of Planning or a senior executive officer of the Department of Planning.)
The amendment in effect largely guarantees the CSPC and Council the continued direct strategic link to the highest levels of the Department of Planning. On the issue of the Government Architect we were able extract a written and Hansard recorded guarantee from the Minister that he had 'no intention of removing the Government Architect' from the CSPC.
regards
Shayne
PS I have highlighted in the Hansard below a reference to our Council. There were many of those last night but this one is of interest.
Subject: Hansard Legislative Council - CSPC amendments
The Hon. GREG PEARCE [7.20 p.m.] by leave: I move Opposition amendments Nos 1, 2 and 3:No. 1 Page 21, schedule 2 [4], lines 12–31. Omit all words on those lines. Insert instead:[4] Section 34 Members of Planning CommitteeOmit section 34 (3).No. 2 Page 22, schedule 2 [11] and [12], lines 20–24. Omit all words on those lines.No. 3 Page 24, schedule 2 [19], proposed clause 33, lines 20–25. Omit all words on those lines.The intention of the amendment is to prevent the change to the Central Sydney Planning Committee membership and appointment process outlined in the bill. I will not want to speak to this amendment at length because I put most of my argument in the second reading debate. However, I want to clear up one issue, and that is in relation to the Government Architect. In my second reading speech I spoke about the Government Architect being a member of the committee. What in fact has happened, I am assured by everyone involved, is that the Government Architect has been appointed as a matter of routine; indeed, the Government's second reading speech assured us that the Government chooses to appoint the Government Architect as one of its appointments, and the Minister has advised that he has no intention of removing the Government Architect from that appointment.That begs the question: Why have the amendment at all if the intention is to continue to have the benefit of the Government Architect as a member of the committee? There seems to be no good reason for the amendment.
I note that councillors John McInerney and Shayne Mallard are in the Chamber. They are very concerned about this matter, as is the city council. I said in my speech to the second reading debate last night that the council had moved a motion, which was passed by 9 votes to 1, supporting the amendments that the Opposition is putting today. That motion was supported by Councillor Verity Firth of the Australian Labor Party, who I am told will be a candidate for the seat of Balmain in the 2007 elections. I am told also that Verity is President Burgmann's favourite niece. So she obviously has a great deal of sense, and her recommendation not to support the amendment, which gives more power to Minister Sartor, is noted. The other member of the committee is the director of the Department of Planning, and we support that continuing membership as well.
The Hon. TONY KELLY (Minister for Justice, Minister for Juvenile Justice, Minister for Emergency Services, Minister for Lands, and Minister for Rural Affairs) [7.21 p.m.]: The Government does not support the Opposition amendments as they would take us back to a complicated and barely workable provision such as we have in the City of Sydney Act for the appointment of independent and non-government members. The bill provides for a better mix of expertise for independent and senior Government members than the status quo proposed by the Opposition.It is important to note that the Government-appointed Central Sydney Planning Committee [CSPC] members initiated these changes with a proposal for eight separate changes to the bill. Suggestions that these changes are an attempt to assert greater authority are simply incorrect. In fact, the Minister specifically did not include a number of changes requested by CSPC members as it was thought those might cause antagonism with the council. As was outlined in the second reading speech in the other place, the current legislation does not specifically nominate the Government Architect as a government member of the CSPC. The reason he is on the committee is that the Government chooses to appoint him. The Minister in the other place gave a specific assurance in the second reading speech that the Minister had no intention of removing the Government Architect as one of the Government nominees. The Government opposes the amendment.
Ms SYLVIA HALE [7.23 p.m.]: The Greens support the amendments. The Opposition's amendments are identical with circulated Greens amendments 11, 12 and 13. It really is ironic that the Central Sydney Planning Committee should comprise seven people, three of whom are elected councillors and four of whom are Government appointees. Clearly, the Government has the power virtually to direct what happens at those committee meetings. When Ms Jennifer Westacott was Director General of Planning she made a point of attending virtually every meeting of the planning committee. Since Mr Haddad has been director general, I understand he is yet to attend one meeting. No doubt this is because of the amount of work that the Department of Planning is now experiencing as bio-developers rush to ask the Government to declare projects to be major part 3A projects or to declare concept approvals.One interesting point I have discovered from reading the Government's literature over a period of time is that, although developments being called in by the department are consuming so much of the director general's time, the average time the department takes to make a decision is seven months. Yet councils are berated because they do not come up with decisions on equally large projects within 40 days. That indicates the double standards adopted by the Government on so many matters. As I have indicated, circulated Greens amendments 11, 12 and 13 are identical with these Opposition amendments, and therefore we support them.
The Hon. TONY KELLY (Minister for Justice, Minister for Juvenile Justice, Minister for Emergency Services, Minister for Lands, and Minister for Rural Affairs) [7.25 p.m.]: I should mention that Reverend the Hon. Fred Nile has foreshadowed an amendment. I indicate that the Government will be supporting his sensible amendment. I understand that his amendment cannot be moved unless these Opposition amendments are defeated.The CHAIR: Reverend the Hon. Fred Nile can move his amendment now. However, if he does and the Opposition amendments are carried, his amendment will lapse. Reverend the
Hon. FRED NILE [7.26 p.m.]: I move Christian Democratic Party amendment on sheet C-088:Page 21, schedule 2 [4]. Insert after line 31:(3) At least one of the senior State government employees appointed under subsection (1) (c) must be either the Director-General of the Department of Planning or a senior executive officer of the Department of Planning.As I said earlier, and as has been picked up by the Hon. Greg Pearce, many red herrings have been raised regarding this bill, from cover to cover, and we have been given considerable misleading information. For instance, we were advised that the Government was ruthlessly scrapping the Government Architect and the Director General of the Department of Planning as members of the planning committee. So we all assumed that they were on the planning committee—until I read the City of Sydney Act of 1988, No. 48. Surprise! Surprise! The Government Architect is not mentioned anywhere in that Act. He may be appointed by the Minister, and he may have been able to attend meetings in the past, but apparently he has not attended. Minister Sartor has indicated in advice to me that he has no objection to the Government Architect being appointed at some time. The Minister has discretion to appoint the Government Architect or another person, as is provided for in the bill as follows:The Minister administering Part 4 of the Planning Act is to obtain the concurrence of the Minister administering the Public Works Act 1912 before appointing a senior State government employee under subsection (1) (c) if the employee is appointed because of his or her expertise in architecture or civic design.I would imagine that could provide for appointment of the Government Architect, or perhaps another person with the same qualifications or with even greater expertise or knowledge if that is required for the planning of the city of Sydney.
The Hon. TONY KELLY (Minister for Justice, Minister for Juvenile Justice, Minister for Emergency Services, Minister for Lands, and Minister for Rural Affairs) [7.28 p.m.]: Now that Reverend the Hon. Fred Nile has moved his amendment, I point out that the Government welcomes his amendment, which clarifies the ongoing important nexus between the Department of Planning and the Central Sydney Planning Committee. It ensures that one of the Government representatives is either the Director General of the Department of Planning or a member of the executive of the Department of Planning. This amendment addresses some perceived concerns on this matter, and it is supported by the Government.Question—That Opposition amendments Nos 1, 2 and 3 be agreed to—put.The Committee divided.
Ayes, 18
Mr BreenDr Chesterfield-EvansMr ClarkeMr CohenMs CusackMr GallacherMiss Gardiner
Mr GayMs HaleMr LynnMr Mason-CoxMs ParkerMrs PaveyMr Pearce
Ms RhiannonMr RyanTellers,Mr CollessMr Harwin
Noes, 23
Mr BrownDr BurgmannMs BurnswoodsMr CatanzaritiMr CostaMr Della BoscaMr DonnellyMs Griffin
Mr HatzistergosMr JenkinsMr KellyMr MacdonaldReverend Dr MoyesReverend NileMr ObeidMr Oldfield
Ms RobertsonMr RoozendaalMs SharpeMr TsangDr WongTellers,Mr PrimroseMr West
Question resolved in the negative.Amendments negatived.Christian Democratic Party amendment No. 1 agreed to.Schedule 2 as amended agreed to.Schedule 3 agreed to.Title agreed to.Bill reported from Committee with an amendment and report adopted.
Third Reading
The Hon. TONY KELLY (Minister for Justice, Minister for Juvenile Justice, Minister for Emergency Services, Minister for Lands, and Minister for Rural Affairs) [7.37 p.m.]: I move:That this bill be now read a third time.The House divided.
Ayes, 22
Mr BrownMs BurnswoodsMr CatanzaritiMr CostaMr Della BoscaMr DonnellyMs FazioMs Griffin
Mr HatzistergosMr JenkinsMr KellyMr MacdonaldReverend Dr MoyesReverend NileMr OldfieldMs Robertson
Mr RoozendaalMs SharpeMr TsangDr WongTellers,Mr PrimroseMr West
Noes, 18
Mr BreenDr Chesterfield-EvansMr ClarkeMr CohenMs CusackMr GallacherMiss Gardiner
Mr GayMs HaleMr LynnMr Mason-CoxMs ParkerMrs PaveyMr Pearce
Ms RhiannonMr RyanTellers,Mr CollessMr Harwin
Question resolved in the affirmative.Motion agreed to.Bill read a third time.[The President left the chair at 7.40 p.m. The House resumed at 8.30 p.m.]
http://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/prod/PARLMENT/hansArt.nsf/V3Key/LC20061122050
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
BACKGROUND NOTES
Environmental Planning Legislation Amendment Bill 2006
City of Sydney opposes the weakening of ‘independence’ of the Central Sydney Planning Committee (CSPC) through amendments contained in the Bill.
Background: CSPC deals with all developments with value above $50 Million eg Westfield Centre point ($430 M) and has a guarantee veto over the LEP (new or amendments) for City of Sydney.
CSPC was created by the Greiner Government to take some of the Council politics out of important economic driver projects in the City and has been largely successful in doing this - even under Frank Sartor as Lord Mayor.
Current City of Sydney Act says the membership of CSPC is (S34):
1(a) the Lord Mayor of Sydney,
(b) a senior government employee with architectural experience nominated by the Minister administering the Public Works Act 1912,
(c) 2 councillors of the City of Sydney elected by the City Council,
(d) the Director of Planning under the Planning Act, and
(e) 2 persons appointed, subject to subsection (2), by the Minister administering Part 4 of the Planning Act.
Bold above indicates the two positions on the CSPC who are members by virtue of their senior and relevant government positions as public servants.
Note that (d) has always resulted in the appointment of the Government Architect since 1988 and is currently respected architect Mr Peter Mould.
The balance and relative independence of the CSPC is being weakened by the amendment to give the Minister absolute control on appointment of all 4 government members.
The amendment to the CSPC in the Bill - Sec 34 (1) ‘Members of Planning Committee’ - Council representatives is unchanged (3 including Lord Mayor as chair).
Amendment Bill - (c) defines the government appointees to the CSPC as
“4 persons (2 of whom are senior State Government employees and 2 of whom are not State or local government employees) appointed by the Minister administering Part 4 of the Planning Act, each having expertise in at least one of architecture, building, civic design, construction, engineering, transport, tourism, the arts, planning or heritage.”
The CSPC discussed this issue last Thursday night and there are strong reservations about removing the ex-officio membership of the Government Architect and the Director General of Planning (or their alternates) from the CSPC.
The minuted views of four of the 7 members (Moore, McInerney, Mallard and La Marchant) was that the Government Architect provided invaluable professional insight and leadership for the CSPC and City as the stateÂ’s top architect and that the DG of Planning provided an invaluable direct linkage to the Department on a critical strategic level for the City.
Both the DG of Planning and the Government Architect are viewed as relatively independent public servants appointed by virtue of their senior positions in the government and not by patronage of the Minister of the day as is now proposed under the amendments.
The Minister has now claimed that the DG of Planning is too busy to attend CSPC meetings. However he sends his appointed alternate Ms Petula Samios.
Because of the seniority of the appointment and it being a legislated position the Department of Planning resources the position to a high standard. This gives the CSPC and Council direct lines of communication to the highest strategic levels of the DOP.
Note that the City of Sydney is the only local government area that is a stand alone sub-region in the metro-strategy and accounts for 18% of the national GDP. The amendments to the Act will sever or at least weaken this strategic relationship between CSPC/Council and the government.
Removal of the Government Architect is also a serious issue for the Architecture profession and its direct role and leadership in the shape and function of the City of Sydney into the future.
Dr Deborah Dearing President of the Royal Australian Institute of Architects has written to all MLCÂ’s expressing their opposition to the amendments.
We refer you to todayÂ’s page 3 SMH article reporting these concerns.
City of Sydney Council meeting on Monday night adopted the following resolution 9 : 1 with two ALP supporting the motion and Clr Michael Lee lone in opposing.
“The Council notes the amendments to the City of Sydney Act currently before the Parliament that remove the ex-officio appointment to the CSPC of the Director General (or alternate) of the Department of Planning and the ‘senior government employee with architecture experience’ that has always been the appointment of the Government Architect of the day. The Council joins with four of the CSPC members in expressing concern about these amendments and calls upon the Minister for Planning to not amend the provisions of the current Act (s34) as it is highly desirable for the City of Sydney to retain the direct relationship of the CSPC and Council with the Director General of the Department of Planning and the Government Architect.”
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment