Planning—Development assessment panels
Statement
Hon Neil Thomson (5:27 pm): I would like to make a few comments about some comments made by Hon John Carey in the other chamber in response to a question from the member for Riverton. Hon John Carey said:
… Hon Neil Thomson … is now actively suggesting to change the make-up of development assessment panels so that they are three–three …
I understand that Hon John Carey is under a lot of pressure. I understand that he had a bad week last week and I understand that he probably had a bad period about two months ago with the Auditor General's report on DevelopmentWA. I do not know the motivation, but I understand that he may be concerned about the agreement of this chamber to establish the Select Committee into Land Development and Planning in Western Australia. I thank members for endorsing my role as chair of that committee. I just want to clarify this point. At no stage have I ever suggested that. That is something that Hon John Carey has made up in his own imagination. I understand that he might think that it was an important point to make, given that he has had a bad week and is probably worried about what might come from taking a very scientific approach to planning.
I hope that Hon John Carey and his staff are listening in on this because I will remind the house that I think it is important that when claims are made, they are backed up with some sort of substance. It is easy to say things. When I raised the matter, on behalf of a number of senior planners from the Planning Institute of Australia, about the appointment of his good friend Emma Cole to be chair of the Western Australian Planning Commission, that was not because I chose to raise that. That was because a letter was written by members of the community.
Hon Dan Caddy: You did choose it or it wouldn't have been raised.
Hon Neil Thomson: It was raised because senior members of the planning community had raised concerns. In fact, I think something like 16 senior planners from the planning community, including many senior women planners, were signatories to that letter. Again, this is the way Hon John Carey rolls. He made the accusation that I was a misogynist because I raised the issue about the governance of the Planning Commission. I raised that because those senior planners, including senior women in the planning industry, had raised that concern. I think it is a totally legitimate thing for a member to raise. For the record, for those who might be interested in this, it is not a technical issue—that is not the case. The claims by Hon John Carey are not true.
I was the drafter of the motion, which was accepted by this chamber, for the establishment of the Select Committee into Land Development and Planning in Western Australia, which stated:
That the select committee inquire into and report on matters relating to land use planning, land transactions and development in Western Australia, with particular regard to the optimality, efficiency, integrity and probity of decisions made by the state and state agencies, including …
This is the important part that Hon John Carey might want to reflect upon to get an understanding of where I come from in relation to planning, because I believe in good planning. I believe the planning industry needs to have the confidence that the planning system is working properly. This is my position on development assessment panels:
(a) in relation to land use planning decisions, the extent to which such decisions align with established local planning schemes, strategies, policies and frameworks, particularly where made by the Western Australian Planning Commission or development assessment panels, including but not limited to decisions made under the so-called Significant Development Pathway;
I understand that Hon John Carey has a lot on his plate. He is under a lot of pressure at the moment because we have this problem in the health system that he has probably inherited and been sent here to try to get some repairs happening. I understand that. But I think he should understand that there is a framework. There is a quasi-judicial and quai-legal process in our system that applies to planning law. Planning law should be applied in a lawful manner. At no stage have I ever gone out and said that there should be a change in the composition of DAPs. Again, that might be something that the committee may wish to consider, but it is not something I have advocated for in this place. I do advocate for the application of law in an orderly and sensible way. I do advocate for sensible strategic planning in which the community gets involved in the early stages of the strategic planning process. The community should be involved in the consultation around the form and function of its community. That is how those frameworks are established. The development assessment process should always be managed in a more professional way that aligns with the established frameworks. If that is too hard for Hon John Carey to understand, I suggest that he spend some time and talk to some senior planners who he did not want to listen to and educate himself on how land use planning works in Western Australia, and actually spends some time focusing his energies on working on the vision and strategic frameworks we need within the state to be able to deliver for Western Australia.
That is my encouragement. I hope that in future we do not have statements like the one about that question. I hope there is sensible discussion. I look forward to it and I thank this chamber for appointing me to the role that I will work very diligently in going forward. Thank you very much.
