Ms O’CONNOR – As we know, the Tasmanian Planning Commission (TPC) is an independent statutory body. Are you able to condense the working relationship between the State Planning Office and the Tasmanian Planning Commission? It might sound like a really basic question, but it’s an important one to wrap our heads around.
Mr VINCENT – It certainly is. I meet with both on a semi‑regular basis. I certainly have a lot more to do with the State Planning Office [inaudible] other things. But I meet with Mr Ramsay, as needed on a regular basis to run over things. But the relationship between the two internally, I’d ask for Mr Ramsay to clarify how you work with the State Planning Office, please.
Mr RAMSAY – Okay. I suppose the difference is that the State Planning Office is policy and we’re the regulator. But we meet every fortnight just to understand what work the State Planning Office is developing, like changes to the State Planning Provisions (SPPs) or changes to the State Coastal Policy, development assessment panels (DAPs), whatever. We basically have an informal exchange that helps us within our forward work program. There is internal consultation on some more technical issues, but that’s the extent of our interaction.
Ms O’CONNOR – Thanks, Mr Ramsay. Was the TPC consulted by government on the development of the Development Assessment Panels legislation? I ask this, in part, because the objective of that legislation was to slightly skirt around some of the existing planning provisions and, certainly, provide an easier path to development.
Mr RAMSAY – Yes, we were consulted informally and we were consulted formally. Formally, we put our views on the record in relation to the first emanation of DAPs. We consulted on the second and third emanations, but only in terms of, ‘Can we make the process work? Are there provisions in the DAPs bill that would be difficult for us to administer, either from a legal perspective or from a time perspective?’ We provided our views to the State Planning Office and formally to the minister when we were part of the consultation process.
Ms O’CONNOR – Thank you. The first DAPs bill was put up by government and the Legislative Council dispatched it very efficiently. I don’t know if this is stepping outside your brief a bit, Mr Ramsay. But to your mind, is the current iteration of the DAPs bill which has been released substantively different in any way from the original, because we don’t think so?
Mr RAMSAY – I think the policy changes are probably not my call to respond to. We understand that it is slightly different. But from our perspective, if we’re asking, ‘Can we make it work in terms of our processes and resources?, the answer that we’ve given is, yes, we could.
Ms O’CONNOR – Okay, thank you. Can we go to the review of the State Coastal Policy? This is also a body of work I would imagine there’s conversations happening between the two parts of the planning system. Minister, is it possible to provide an update of where the State Coastal Policy review is at? It would be great to get an expression of commitment from you to an ongoing robust State Coastal Policy that’s in line with our resource management and planning system objectives around sustainable development.
Mr VINCENT – Thank you. I will ask Mr Reid for a summary of where the State Coastal Policy is at the moment.
Ms O’CONNOR – I’m very happy to get that information from you, as the minister now, knowing how much Tasmanians value their coastline. It’s now some time since the Robbins Island wharf issue went through and the first discussions of changes to the state coastal policy were put forward. It’s gone a bit quiet. Could you give us a succinct encapsulation of the objectives. I would like to hear from Mr Reid, but also from Mr Ramsay on the consultation state coastal policy review.
Mr VINCENT – Thank you. In my short time in the role, it hasn’t been a big part of what I’ve had to discuss or work my way through at the moment, and that is the reason I would love for Mr Reid to give a bit more summary. Thank you.
Mr REID – I certainly can, minister. I won’t speak for the TPC on where they’re at with their process, but the then‑minister at the time and the Premier issued a ministerial direction to the Tasmanian Planning Commission under the State Policies and Projects Act, directing it to provide advice on whether a proposed amendment constitutes a significant change to the policy. Upon receipt of that advice, the minister agreed with the commission and determined that the amendment was a significant change to the policy, and made a subsequent direction to the commission to prepare a report and undertake an assessment of that policy, which I understand is the process that’s under way at the moment.
The draft amendment to the policy was placed on public exhibition from 30 June to 25 August 2025, and I understand 203 submissions – I’m not sure that’s correct, John – were received, and advised that 90 per cent of those submissions were in a pro forma template.
The advice I have before me is the public hearings are scheduled for either November this year, or –
Mr RAMSAY – They start next week.
Ms O’CONNOR – Public hearings on the state coastal policy amendment.
Mr RAMSAY – Yes. We’ve appointed a panel of delegates to undertake the assessment, and it starts next week, having hearings in Burnie, Launceston and Hobart over about an eight‑day period.
Ms O’CONNOR – Thank you, Mr Ramsay. I’m sure that timeframes have been set out on the very efficient TPC website, which is –
CHAIR – I’m surprised you haven’t been on there.
Ms O’CONNOR – I have been on there, but not in the last few – probably days, to be honest with you. Perhaps, for the purposes of the committee’s understanding, just to give us an indication of timelines on when the TPC will report back on the review, and then I would like to go back to the minister about what the objective is here.
Mr VINCENT – I am of the understanding that the recommendations will be before me in early 2026. I will ask Mr Ramsay if he’s got –
Mr RAMSAY – Yes, that’s our expectation. Until we do the hearings and find out what the issues are, it’s a bit hard to make time commitment to it. Interestingly, there are no timelines for this process, but we are hoping to get all the hearings done before Christmas and have the report written either before Christmas or at least in the new year, and then we’d report back to the minister.
Ms O’CONNOR – So minister, what’s the objective?
Mr VINCENT – And I have not developed any expectations or objectives at this point in time but will do over coming months.
Ms O’CONNOR – Okay, well thank you for that clarification, because the objective that was stated by government prior, was to facilitate potentially more development within the one-kilometre coastal defined zone, if you like – loosely‑defined zone in the state coastal policy. It was to allow more development in the coastal zone. That’s not something you’d confirm as a stated objective, at this point.
Mr VINCENT – Not at this point in time. I haven’t familiarised myself with all the points of this policy at this stage but will be over coming months.
Ms O’CONNOR – Can I ask you whether you agree with the notion the state coastal policy, while outdated and imperfect, has done a pretty good job of protecting coastal access and made sure that, unlike many other parts of the country, we haven’t gone headlong into coastal development in a way that damages values here and our brand?
Mr VINCENT – There are points that have been raised in court that question some of the legalities around some of those points, and that’s where this body of work is working through at the moment. As that is worked through, I will develop more of a thought pattern around it. I can’t give an answer more than that, because I just haven’t had enough time in the ministry yet to cover all these points, but I know the work that’s being done State Planning Office and will be by Mr Ramsay, as will be part of my education process on that.
Ms O’CONNOR – Does someone who grew up in Joh Bjelke-Petersen’s Queensland where canal estates just erupted all over the coast, I’m hoping you would see the state coastal policy as a policy wouldn’t be something you’d chuck the whole thing out of and write again given the pretty fair job it’s done of protecting coastal values and providing for access.
Mr VINCENT – I understand your passion towards this and take fully on board.
Ms O’CONNOR – That’s not an answer to the question, but thanks for the flattery.
Mr VINCENT – I hope you’ve been able to see today that I am injecting myself into as many parts of my ministry to learn as much as I can before I make decisions and this is one of those situations. Yes, I am being polite with my answer, but you still have my commitment that I’m working my way through it.
CHAIR – Any other questions?
Ms O’CONNOR – I could sit here all day and ask questions but no I am fine for now.
Mr VINCENT – Always happy to take questions on board normally, anyway, so always approach on any of that.
CHAIR – Thank you, minister, for your time on Housing and Planning. We will have a 15-minute break and come back to Local Government.
