Ms BURNET (Clark) – Honourable Speaker, well, here we go again. We are back in DAPs, to borrow from an Amy Winehouse song title, and reintroducing the development assessment panels, which is a disappointing and cynical, questionable use of parliamentary time, in my opinion, and I am not alone in that position. Unfortunately, minister Kerry Vincent’s media release on the introduction of development assessment panels’ latest round of consultation was titled ‘Taking the Politics Out of Planning’. This was the exact same phrase that minister Felix Ellis kept using when he tried, and failed, to convince not only those people interested in good planning outcomes for the places they love and know intimately across Tasmania but also this parliament, which roundly rejected the Ellis meddling in planning.
Even though Mr Vincent says he has listened to concerns and removed the minister’s role in referring development assessments to a panel, it sounds a bit like putting lipstick on a pig, if you will. Minister, this lacks all credibility, which is a big setback with your good reputation as a can‑do minister.
Who is actually driving this third push for development assessment panels? We could hazard a guess, but it is pretty clear that someone wants the new planning minister to deliver for them. One of the key issues that people raised with us was the removal of the right to appeal, and it doesn’t look like this has been addressed at all. Perhaps instead of consulting the public on this over and over ‑ it’s extremely clear that local governments, planning stakeholders and community members alike reject this proposal ‑ could the government tell us what problem they think DAPs will solve? What is the point of consulting the public, receiving overwhelming opposition, making minor tweaks and trying yet again? I quote from one person, Dave, already primed to oppose the DAPs round 3. Dave says:
I am disappointed to have to write to you all again and have to point out things about this legislation which will still concern me, as it should all of you. The 2025 revised legislation has not significantly changed from the 2024 version that was refused by the parliament and retains all the key flaws.
Research demonstrates DAPs are pro‑development and pro‑government. DAPs will make it easier to approve large‑scale contentious developments, like Kunanyi‑Mount Wellington cable car, high‑rises in Hobart, Cambria Green, and high-density subdivisions like Skylands and Droughty Point. I could go on.
In summary, the reintroduction of the DAPs for the third time is a cynical exercise. It really does feel that it’s beneath Mr Vincent. I’m sure he will hear, very loudly and clearly, from our former local government colleagues and those who love and know this island: yet again, scrap the introduction of DAPs.
