Age Opinion Piece

In reply to an article in the Age, which you can read here. I wrote: 

The Age reported upon criticism of a "loophole" in Planning and Environment Act 1987 that allegedly favours developers. Criticism was brought upon section 79 of Act by a former planning minister and some local councillors.  

 

Section 79 merely states, "An applicant for a permit may apply to the Tribunal for review of the failure of the responsible authority to grant the permit within the prescribed time." In practice, it allows applicants to request a VCAT hearing once a local council has taken more than sixty days to make a decision in a planning matter. The Act sets forth a very strict timetable for councils and other responsible authorities to make decisions. This is in the interest of applicants, developers and the general public. Every day a development is held up by the inefficient bureaucracies of local council is an added cost to a project, and in the end the consumer.

 

An efficient planning act is essential to having low-cost housing. The more red-tape developers and builders must cross makes housing more unaffordable. Local councils are merely attempting further bureaucratize the already bloated planning process by protesting against section 79.

 

This section is one of the few options available to developers when councils are unresponsive and adding unnecessary delays and costs to a project. Section 79 is not a loophole, it is a safeguard against inefficient local councils. If anything, it should not be removed, but substantial monetary penalties imposed upon councils that are unable to work within the timeframe outlined in the Act. This would make councils more responsive and result in lower housing prices – a benefit for all parties.

 

 

Aron Ping D'Souza

Doctoral Candidate

The Melbourne Law School