Ms BURNET (Clark) – Honourable Speaker, I speak to the suspension of Standing Orders and why the Greens are adamant this should not be required. Why the urgency? The Leader of the House has provided a Christmas deadline but that is not a substantial reason, particularly in relation to Stony Rise.
Tabled bills, as I said earlier, should have time to mature and that is a tenet of the parliament. It is totally lost when you do not only have maturity of bills but the chance to listen to or to properly process submissions. There are 461 submissions in relation to the development assessment panels bill and there was no consultation in relation to Stony Rise when it was tabled. How is that a good process? It is an arrogant and bull-headed approach to planning and it is a disgraceful approach to planning and the public interest. It is an absolutely appalling process, so the urgency is not required.
One of the major concerns is that should urgency of a planning matter be that important to prosecute before the end of the year, one would think it might be about affordable housing. With Stony Rise, no matter what this development is, it is certainly not affordable housing. It is not a housing application, it is a commercial application. In fact, there are other property developers who are very concerned about this corruption of process because it is doing spot zoning. For goodness’ sake, is that something that we should be considering as a parliament? It is unfathomable how low this government is stooping in relation to planning
There are plenty of other reasons I want to touch on. We have talked about no consultation, paying lip service or maybe getting ChatGPT to look at the 461 submissions which on DAPs closed late last week, so there has really not been much time to really have a look at those things, and there is very little evidence that these pathways to fix a housing crisis that Mr Ellis as Housing minister is talking about. He is not getting traction.
This is not the way with development assessment panels and I am going back and forth with these two conflated bills because that is what the government wants us to consider with little concern about what the subject or the content is. He wants to introduce phoney pathways that will not deliver the houses that Mr Ellis has responsibility for. He wants to blame the community. He just labels them as NIMBYs, he labels mayors, he has been totally disrespectful to the Local Government and Planning sector and it is also folly that his government has not delivered on strategic planning.
Not only does the government not deliver on the mandatory pre-commitment card or ferries, but they cannot deliver on strategic planning as well, and the regional land use strategy is partly why the Stony Rise development has come to this parliament. It is a pox on this House or the government’s –
Time expired.
