loss of public lands

Julianne Bell of Protectors of Public Land Victoria will be the speaker at a meeting of concerned citizens "Protecting Heritage and Public Interest in Banyule," Sunday July 6th, 2.00pm for 2.30pm, Seddon St. Community Centre, Ivanhoe. Ivanhoe Civic Precinct Master Plan includes demolition of the current library and privatisation of three lots of civic land. You can attend the meeting and be listed to speak at the start of the meeting.

Ivanhoe Civic Precinct Master Plan includes demolition of the current, iconic, ‘mid-century modernist’ design Library and privatisation of three lots of civic land!
Two of the sites are adjacent to the Civic Precinct. i.e. (1), a well landscaped CAR PARK - west of Upper Heidelberg Rd and off Ivanhoe Parade (west) and (2), Lot 14, Ivanhoe Parade (west) – including both the Ivanhoe Senior Citizens Hall and the Arts Community Space buildings and (3), residential development within the Civic Precinct site.

Currently all three are council/ rate payer-owned land!

What you can do:

You can attend the Banyule Council Meeting Monday July 7th - 7pm for 7.30pm

And be listed to speak at the start of the meeting,

and/or write -

To All Councillors, the CEO, and relevant officers - PO Box 51, Ivanhoe 3079/ [email protected]

You can be added to Councils email list to be updated by contacting Ben Smith 9490 4222: [email protected]

Also see http://www.fairyhillsivanhoe.com

And attend the meeting:
"Protecting Heritage and Public Interest in Banyule"
Sunday July 6th
2.00pm for 2.30pm
Seddon St. Community Centre, Ivanhoe

Our speaker is

Julianne Bell “Protectors of Public Land”

Everyone welcome / Gold coin donation

More Information 0427 949 951/ 0411 154 914

Join us to discuss these important issues of our time.
The first part of the meeting will cover the Proposed Plan for the CIVIC PRECINCT and actions people can take regarding the Plan; the second part will cover the Proposed Council Lease of CHELSWORTH PARK to a private school for 30 years

Extra information:
http://www.banyule.vic.gov.au/Services/Parks-and-Facilities/Ivanhoe-Senior-Citizens-Hall

http://www.banyule.vic.gov.au/Services/Parks-and-Facilities/Hatch-Contemporary-Arts

http://planningschemes.dpcd.vic.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0015/160053/banyule14ho.pdf

(Lot No’s and Heritage Overlays in Ivanhoe Parade and the Civic Precinct area of the Ivanhoe Shopping Centre)
http://www.fairyhillsivanhoe.com/

Ivanhoe’s much loved Chelsworth Park, on the Yarra flood plain near the southern entrance to Banyule, is currently being considered for a 20 +10 year Commercial Lease between Banyule City Council (BCC) Ivanhoe Grammar School (IGS) - A commercial entity.

A Commercial Lease threatens the ability of our Community to decide how the park will be used, over a period of expected high population increase in Melbourne and Ivanhoe and a growing reduction in private residential space - as the number of multi-unit dwellings increase due to Government policy.

Many residents of Banyule oppose this move and believe that

1. Restrictions on the availability of the park, for both passive and active use - if leased to a private entity, are not in the community’s long-term interests.

2. Banyule City Council needs to step up to the mark and provide first-rate facilities for the ratepayers of Banyule in all its parks and for all its schools to share equally - rather than over-use some parks (nearby Ivanhoe Park) and under use and under support others (Ford Park). Council needs to do more to ensure that passive recreation, and the riverine environment for which Chelsworth Park is famous, are protected into the future.

3. More transparency is needed – Governance and Financial Reporting conditions under the current IGS peppercorn lease, have NOT been met (- despite fees from the Clubs using the Park going to IGS); In addition, Chelsworth Park continues to receive favourable infrastructure funding from Council - while other Parks miss out.

Current Griffin Ward Councillor Jenny Mulholland has given little support to major community concerns.

WHAT CAN YOU DO?

Write : To All Councillors, the CEO, and relevant officers
(PO Box 51, Ivanhoe 3079/ [email protected] ) and
Phone: Current Ward Councillor, Jenny Mulholland, and current Mayor, Craig Langdon
Jenny: 0413 986 912; (PO Box 51, Ivanhoe 3079; [email protected])
Craig : 0401 097 032; (PO Box 51, Ivanhoe 3079; [email protected])

Insist Council rent the land at commercial real estate rates over the short term*, (- say 5 year maximum renewals) where spare time and playing surface capacity exists, and after community needs are met . (*This could involve IGS marking, mowing, and watering the grounds as now, - as payment in kind, but with Council managing all infrastructure and community bookings)

Insist BCC control all signage, bookings, payment and community liaison (as with its other parks )

Insist that NO EXTRA business use be granted; Instead, over time, business use will be reduced while increasing community needs are met.

Ask to be notified: - of any BCC Chelsworth Plans, relevant Council Meetings and Plan exhibits - Contact Tom Zappulla : [email protected] : 9490 4222

And see: http://www.fairyhillsivanhoe.com for more info – Email contact available on the CONTACTS page

Attend the Upcoming Community Meeting:

‘Protecting Heritage and Public Interest in Banyule’
Speaker Julianne Bell of Protectors of Public Lands
Sunday July 6th
2.00pm for 2.30pm
Seddon St. Community Centre Ivanhoe
Gold coin donation / More Information 0427 949 951 / 0411 154 914 (Robyn / Paul)

Chelsworth Park is our Park - Community asset, not private takeover!

Join us to discuss these issues of our time.

The Important Politics of Public Shopping Strips vs Private Shopping Malls

The subject matter of other comments involved the retention of shopping strips over private malls. This is very important because it involves the retention of public land - where people have the right to demonstrate, film and give out information. In contrast, the privatisation of commercial land into malls permits the developer-owners to exercise complex restraints over what retailers and customers may do. These rules generally rule out democratic activity beyond shopping. These malls are also beyond local council laws in terms of democratic input available to citizens who rent, shop or frequent shopping strips. What this means is that the 'market place' where much political communication has taken place since humans first formed villages and towns, is being lost. #n3581_fn1" id="n3581_txt1">[1] #n3581_fn2" id="n3581_txt2">[2]

Planning fails democracy 101

One participant who admitted she had only skimmed the hefty document “Plan Melbourne” protested the lack of democratic principles in it. Mathew Guy defended his work on the basis that Plan Melbourne protected about half of Melbourne's residential areas whereas before they had not had such protection. He was vehement that he had limited developers’ activities in the interests of residents. The participant remained unconvinced saying she would go home and read the document thoroughly – such are the tasks now for Melbourne residents who feel any responsibility about the future of their city. As far as most were concerned, they were there because they felt that the public were largely left out of the planning process although it affects them in ways that are often quite devastating. They have formed community groups because they are very unhappy with this.

VCAT: a State Government tool

One participant raised the issue of VCAT’s role in development and planning.

Minister Guy distanced himself from any sense of control over VCAT, emphasizing where he and they had disagreed, saying "I expect no Christmas cards from VCAT".

The Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal(VCAT)is a State entity and the State Govt has total control over VCAT beyond even what most know.

VCAT, a very active arm of State Govt in promoting overdevelopment, is staffed by Members with no security of tenure. If Members fail to promote the State Govt line on Planning Policy about "managing population growth" (read Rapid Population Growth 60% from NOM must be accommodated by densification and destruction of amenity) then the Member's appointment is not renewed. As a local councillor on another occasion was heard to observe, "It is the perfect system." That is, it is the perfect system for promoting overdevelopment because VCAT very deliberately, repeatedly overrides the local democracy of Council on neigbourhood amenity. And woe betide the VCAT Member who fails to get the message.

The whole thrust of the MPS and the New Zones too is to "Cut Red Tape." There is a whole Victorian Government and Federal Productivity Commission project named as such - explicitly to define areas for open slather for developers. The vast legacy of VCAT decision precedents which have to date been so pro-development "by happenstance", is now to be implemented in concrete on the New Zones and the new MPS. As if Minister Guy and his predecessors had nothing to do with it because of the separation of powers.

Matthew Guy very confusing on facts

When Mathew Guy finally took SPA Victoria President, Jill Quirk's question, about his erroneous pronouncement that 85 per cent of Melbourne's population growth was from natural increase, Mr Guy stated that he had said that 85% of population growth would be in Melbourne. He added then that natural increase was about half Melbourne's population growth. Ms Quirk had to disagree again, informing him that only 40 per cent was due to natural increase, whereas 60 per cent is due to overseas migration. Mr Guy agreed. After the meeting, candobetter's attention was drawn to the fact that the ratio 60/40 was stated in the draft of the “Plan Melbourne” (“Melbourne, let’s talk About the future” ) document but that this fact has been omitted from the final document. Perhaps the government thought that Victorians would not notice. It seems likely that the government prefers to conceal the fact that high population growth is inflicted on the people of Melbourne through high immigration. Further, that the Victorian government is more than happy to have as much of this growth as possible regardless of the shortfalls in infrastructure services and the displeasure of citizens who see their amenity disappearing, as the city sprawls outwards and the density of established suburbs increases.

Ms. Quirk went on to say that Victoria's population would reach about 20m by the end of the century –on the same scale as the entire population of Australia today if recent growth continues.

Mr Guy countered that State government did not really have much control over this.

Ms Quirk drew Mr Guy's attention to the fact that he had been reported recently in the news saying MP for Wills, Kelvin Thompson was ridiculous to say that immigration should be less.

Mr. Guy's response was to say that by saying that Mr. Thomson had had six years to convince his government of his point of view on population and had failed to do so.

Ms Quirk said that she did not think Mr Guy could blame Thomson for the situation we are now in.

State is engineering frightening and undemocratic population growth in Melbourne

In relation to the State Government's ability to control immigration, Ms Quirk pointed out that the Victorian government runs a website called http://www.liveinvictoria.gov.au, which promotes population growth.

Mr Guy's response was, "Yes, I'm aware of that."

Discussing within groups after the event came to the conclusion that the effect of Mr Guy's erroneous pronouncement that 85 per cent of pop growth was due to natural increase, if left uncountered, would have been to have made Victoria's frightening rate of population increase seem inevitable.

What, we wondered, was the purpose of this meeting organised by Matthew Guy? Presumably it was to tick the box of 'consultation'. In fact, Planning Melbourne will no longer take comments on the substance of the actual document, only on its implementation.

The participant's objection to the apparent absence of democracy in "Plan Melbourne" has been well demonstrated.

Victoria's state government is effectively a dictatorship. The extreme population growth accompanying this abrogation of democracy is contributing to homelessness, unaffordability, debt, environmental destruction, increasing gaps between rich and poor, and relatedly to increasing drug abuse, gambling, relationship break up and violence.

NOTES

This talk was formally entitled, in the invitations, as "Community group briefing". It took place on Friday 25 October, 2013, from 3.00pm to 4.00pm in the Sir Redmond Barry Room at 46, 55 Collins Street, Melbourne.

#n3581_fn1" id="n3581_fn1">[1] #n3581_txt1">↑ Art critic, Mark Holsworth, writes that 'Historically no city in Victoria was designed with a square because the then Governor Gipps didn’t like them because they encourage democracy. Melbourne City Square was only built in 1980 (when democracy was no longer a threat)..." Source: http://melbourneartcritic.wordpress.com/tag/governor-gipps/

#n3581_fn2" id="n3581_fn2">[2] #n3581_txt2">↑ A very good article on the covert and creeping privatisation of public land can be found here: http://thenextwavefutures.wordpress.com/2011/11/12/privatising-public-space-1/

There is an Orwellian new Bill on the brink of being passed in Victoria's Parliament. (Debate 27 June) The Bill justifies reducing public rights to consultation and objection by narrowing the scope of consultation, by reducing the scope of information given to the public in respect of revocation of reserves of public land and compulsory acquisition of land, public and private. It allows enormous discretion on the part of the Minister with regard to what information and consultation he allows, even with local government bodies. The really Orwellian part of the Bill is the circular justification of these reductions in citizens' civil rights on so-called grounds of 'efficiency' and 'time saving'. In this case 'cutting red tape' means 'cutting out democracy'.

This new Major Transport Projects Facilitation Amendment (East West Link and Other Projects) Bill 2013 is to be debated on 27 June in the Legislative Assembly. The Bill, by its very name, shows that it has been drafted to push through a particular hated series of private toll-roads that will horribly scar our green landscape and drastically reduce habitat for native animals. We refer to the East-West Link, which Kelvin Thomson has described as "con job". This legislation is part of a frightening trend to remove public land, particularly green, natural land and parks from Melbourne and its surrounds.

Protectors of Public Lands Victoria Inc say that it is very important that the public attend Parliament for the second reading and debate on the Major Transport Projects Facilitation Amendment (East West Link and Other Projects) Bill 2013 in the Legislative Assembly on Thursday 27 June 2013.

Government and Opposition need to see large numbers of the public in attendance in the public galleries. It is important to signify public vigilance and opposition to the East West Link and support for the Doncaster Rail Project, which the public actually want and which represents a true alternative.

Thursday 27 June 2013 is the last sitting day of Parliament before the winter recess. The Bill will go to the Upper House - the Legislative Council - to be considered on the first day of the new term of Parliamentary sitting i.e. 20 August 2013.

By next Tuesday afternoon there should be an estimated time for the Bill to be heard in the Legislative Assembly on the Thursday 27 June and therefore when to attend. The public can ring the Legislative Assembly Papers Office by ringing the Parliament House switch phone: 9651 8911 or try [email protected].

Community Activist groups monitoring these proposed reductions in democratic rights to object to unwanted development are Protectors of Public Lands Victoria Inc. (PPL VIC) and Yarra Campaign for Action on Transport (YCAT)

Below we have emboldened key comments in the parliamentary 'statement of compatibility with human rights' of the bill. Below that we have reproduced the second reading of the bill.

Page 2162

MAJOR TRANSPORT PROJECTS FACILITATION AMENDMENT (EAST WEST
LINK AND OTHER PROJECTS) BILL 2013

Statement of compatibility

Mr MULDER (Minister for Public Transport) tabled following statement in
accordance with Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006:

In accordance with section 28 of the Charter of Human Rights and
Responsibilities Act 2006 (charter act), I make this statement of
compatibility with respect to the Major Transport Projects Facilitation
Amendment (East West Link and Other Projects) Bill 2013.

In my opinion, the Major Transport Projects Facilitation Amendment (East West
Link and Other Projects) Bill 2013, as introduced to the Legislative Assembly,
is compatible with the human rights protected by the charter act. I base my
opinion on the reasons outlined in this statement.

Overview of bill

The main purposes of the bill are to:

amend the Major Transport Projects Facilitation Act 2009 to reduce
procedural delays and red tape in relation to major transport projects; and

amend the Transport Integration Act 2010 to improve the operation of that
act.

Human rights issues

Section 15 of the charter act protects a person's right to freedom of
expression, which includes the freedom to seek, receive and impart
information. The right to freedom of expression is not absolute; lawful
restrictions reasonably necessary to protect the rights of other persons, or
for the protection of public order and public health, are permissible under
the charter act.

Restricting a person's ability to receive information in the form of
Government Gazette notices could engage the right of freedom of expression.
Clauses 7(2), 11(1), 12(1), 15, 17(3), 22, 51, 52 and 65(1) in the bill remove
requirements to publish certain notices in the Government Gazette from the
Major Transport Projects Facilitation Act 2009.

However, the bill does not limit the right of freedom of expression because it
requires or does not affect the requirement to publish notices on websites of
agencies and, therefore, the relevant information remains widely accessible to
the public and potentially in a way that is more accessible and user friendly.
In some cases (clauses 6 and 14(2)), the requirement to publish information on
the departmental website is new and therefore positively promotes the right to
receive information.

Clauses 16(c) and 23(c) of the bill change requirements relating to
documentation for assessment under the impact management plan and
comprehensive impact statement respectively. The changes remove some
information requirements for those documents which could engage the right of
freedom of information as it affects the ability of the public to receive
information.

[Ends justify the means? (Ed.)]

In so far as these amendments limit the right to the freedom of information,
in my opinion the limitation is justifiable and proportionate to the bill's
objective of reducing red tape and procedural delays. In addition, the
restrictions are limited in nature as the information is still provided in
accordance with scoping directions (the publicly available requirements for
project assessment documentation) issued by the planning minister and sections
27(a), (f)-(h) and 39(a), (f)-(i).

Clause 21 of the bill also engages the right to freedom of expression by
amending the Major Transport Projects Facilitation Act 2009 to allow the
planning minister to confine the scope of any public hearing to specified
matters. Clause 21 may also engage the right to take part in public life by
limiting the degree of involvement during a public hearing, if the minister
exercises his or her discretion to confine the scope of a hearing.

Section 18 of the charter act provides that every person has the right, and is
to have the opportunity, without discrimination, to participate in the conduct
of public affairs, directly or through freely chosen representatives, for
example by exerting influence through public dialogue and debate with elected
representatives.

However, members of the public are not restricted from making written
submissions to the assessment committee and verbal submissions to the
assessment committee where a confinement does not apply. Therefore, although
clause 21 of the bill limits these rights, in my opinion the limitation is
justifiable on the basis that the limitation reflects the purpose of the bill
to reduce procedural delay and cut red tape in relation to major transport
projects. It is also a limited restriction as members of the public are still
able to convey their views and participate in the engagement process required
by the Major Transport Projects Facilitation Act 2009. Therefore the public
can still participate in influencing the final approval decision of the
minister.

Section 19(1) of the charter act provides that all persons with a particular
cultural, religious, racial or linguistic background must not be denied the
right, in community with other persons of that background, to enjoy his or her
culture.

Clause 59 of the bill allows for reservations of land under the Crown Land
(Reserves) Act 1978 to be revoked and therefore engages cultural rights
generally. The Crown Land (Reserves) Act 1978 enables Crown land to be
permanently or temporarily reserved for a range of purposes, including
purposes which involve the creation, protection or preservation of places of
cultural significance.

However, revoking a reservation for the purpose of an approved project will
only occur following an assessment and approvals process under the Major
Transport Projects Facilitation Act 2009 and a transparent and public process
under division 5 of part 3 of that act. Therefore, the bill maintains cultural
rights by providing groups whose cultural rights may be affected and the
public generally with an opportunity to participate in the decision-making
process where a reservation is revoked.

Clause 59 also engages the right to take part in public life as impacts on
public participation on the basis that reservations can be revoked. However,
again the limitation is proportionate and justifiable on the basis that the
revocation must occur in accordance with the proper processes under the Crown
Land (Reserves) Act 1978 and the public participation mechanisms in the Major
Transport Projects Facilitation Act 2009.

Section 20 of the charter act provides that a person must not be deprived of
his or her property other than in accordance with law. Any law that deprives a
person of property must be accessible, sufficiently precise and should not
provide for an arbitrary interference with property. Clause 73 of the bill
inserts a new section 138A into the Transport Integration Act 2009 which
allows the Linking Melbourne Authority to compulsorily acquire land required
in connection with the performance of its powers or the exercise of its
functions.

Compulsory acquisition of an individual's land is a deprivation of property
for the purpose of the right to property. However, the acquisition of
interests in land under the bill requires ministerial approval.

[That's sure to be a big comfort! - Ed.]

The compensation requirements in the Land Acquisition and Compensation Act 2009
also apply, with minor modifications.

A person deprived of their land under these clauses must be properly notified
and compensated, and may test the lawfulness of an acquisition through
judicial review. In addition, clause 55 does not limit planning compensation.
Accordingly, in my view, compulsory acquisition of land under the bill would
be in accordance with the law and these provisions do not limit the property
right.

Conclusion

For the reasons outlined above, I consider that the bill is compatible with
the charter act.

Terry Mulder, MP

Minister for Public Transport

MAJOR TRANSPORT PROJECTS FACILITATION AMENDMENT (EAST WEST
LINK AND OTHER PROJECTS) BILL 2013

Second reading Title MAJOR TRANSPORT PROJECTS FACILITATION AMENDMENT (EAST WEST LINK AND OTHER PROJECTS) BILL 2013

House ASSEMBLY
Activity Second Reading
Members MULDER
Date 13 June 2013 Page 2163

Page 2163

MAJOR TRANSPORT PROJECTS FACILITATION AMENDMENT (EAST WEST
LINK AND OTHER PROJECTS) BILL 2013

Second reading

Mr MULDER (Minister for Public Transport)

-- I move:

That this bill be now read a second time.

Transport context

Victoria is growing and changing. The demand for travel and the need to
efficiently move people and goods is growing every day.

The coalition government is committed to delivering major transport
infrastructure projects. They are essential to our economic future and our
livability.

Congestion on roads and on public transport hurts our economy and affects all of
our day-to-day lives.

The government is taking decisive action to cut red tape to allow for the
assessment and delivery of major transport projects more quickly and
efficiently.

Legislation has a key part to play in cutting red tape to address the
infrastructure backlog. This is central to transforming our transport system.
Put simply, this bill will deliver much needed infrastructure sooner, and at a
lower cost.

The coalition did not oppose the Major Transport Projects Facilitation Act when
it was introduced into this house in 2009.

There are, however, a range of improvements that need to be made to the scheme
to cut red tape and boost productivity for the assessment, and delivery of
declared projects.

The benefits to major transport projects

The east-west road link, the Melbourne Metro rail tunnel and the port of
Hastings are transformative projects. The quicker they are delivered, the
quicker Victorians and Victorian businesses will see the benefits.

The east-west road link is a city-shaping project for Victoria. The new
18-kilometre cross-city freeway-standard link will provide an alternative to the

---

Page 2164

M1 corridor, alleviate chronic congestion and improve travel time for motorists
and allow freight to be moved around more quickly. The government has committed
to fund stage 1 of this project, which has an estimated capital cost of between
$6 billion and $8 billion.

The Melbourne Metro rail tunnel will untangle the rail network and unlock the
capacity needed to expand the network and increase services to Melbourne's
growth areas in the north, west and south-east. Creating capacity, particularly
in the city loop, also means that more trains can run on all the lines, not just
those running through the new tunnel. In 2012, the government made the first
state contribution to the project, allocating $49.7 million.

Subject to the Premier's approval the legislation will also enable the port of
Hastings development to be delivered.

This project is essential for Victoria's future and the government has provided
$110 million in the budget to kick-start the development.

This act, with the substantial improvements before you, is the foundation on
which these crucial projects can be delivered.

It would also be a mistake to think that the bill is only for
multibillion-dollar projects. It is not just about capital expenditure, it is
about the value to the community that new and upgraded parts of the transport
network can bring. Cycling networks, for example, face the same barriers as
other linear projects in road and rail and the issues associated with getting
projects delivered.

This legislation provides an alternative to the environment effects statement
process and the multiple approvals required to deliver state-significant
projects.

Delivering major transport projects is a very costly exercise. This bill is
designed to cut down on bureaucracy and channel state funds to where it can
deliver the most benefit -- the transport infrastructure on which we all rely.

Policy context

The changes before the house are a cornerstone of the government's budget
commitment to deliver better value in infrastructure planning and delivery.

As the budget papers state:

The government is driving better value for money, streamlining project
approvals and cutting red tape to expedite major projects coming to market.
The government is continuing to implement rigorous processes to improve
infrastructure project delivery and ensure the cost pressures that affected
major projects in the past are not repeated.

This is precisely what this bill is designed to do.

In December last year the government released its economic statement, 'Securing
Victoria's Economy -- Planning, Building, Delivering'.

The strategy outlines the government's vision for public sector reform involving
controlling costs, reducing internal red tape and improving management within
the public sector.

This bill exemplifies this government's commitment to work harder and to work
smarter to cut red tape so the benefits of major transport projects can be
delivered sooner.

The bill

Part 1 of the bill deals with preliminary matters.

Part 2 of the bill makes changes to the Major Transport Projects Facilitation
Act 2009 to:

introduce a more risk-based assessment regime;

enable early works on projects, including the

east-west link;

shorten statutory time frames to improve productivity and speed up projects;

simplify administrative processes;

enable more efficient land assembly and project delivery; and

extend the scope of the act.

Part 3 of the bill addresses other related amendments.

Key changes to the regime

Moving progressively to a risk-based assessment enables a more proportionate
approach to different risks. This will improve assessment efficiencies and
deliver a more practical and focused assessment report for public exhibition and
consultation.

Early works on projects can provide an opportunity to structure projects to
maximise efficiency and create jobs sooner. This bill makes clear that
declaration of a project does not prevent the delivery of early works outside of
the act's provisions. The act expands, rather than replaces, the methods of
obtaining the necessary approvals for a major transport project. For projects

---

Page 2165

with early works, it is simply a matter of obtaining any required planning or
environment approvals in accordance with existing applicable laws.

This bill makes significant cuts to time frames for decisions in the assessment
and approval process. Time frames for decisions around pathways, scoping,
release of key documents and approvals have all been halved or more than halved.

The bill not only cuts time frames for decision making, but changes the scheme
to allocate resources more efficiently and shift the focus to the project,
rather than the process itself. An example of this is the simplification of the
administrative steps required to have a project declared.

What the bill does not do is reduce the time frame for public exhibition -- the
onus is on government and government agencies to work more efficiently. This
power does not prevent government from consulting with councils, where relevant.

The bill extends an existing provision to make clear that councils cannot
frustrate projects once that project has been approved by the Minister for
Planning.

The bill introduces a statutory duty on state agencies to act and make decisions
expeditiously to avoid delay.

The bill also enables more efficient project delivery by reducing red tape to
improve the arrangements for land assembly.

Conclusion

The changes cut red tape to boost productivity in the assessment and delivery of
projects under the act.

The burden of red tape in the system is shouldered by the community and by
business. Every week a project is tied up in administration is another week of
congestion on our transport system. Congestion increases business costs and
decreases the amount of time we all get to spend with our families.

This bill cuts red tape for projects. This bill cuts the time taken to assess,
approve and deliver major transport projects. This bill gives that time back to
the people of Victoria.

I commend the bill to the house.

Debate adjourned on motion of Mr SCOTT (Preston).

Debate adjourned until Thursday, 27 June.

Last Updated on Wednesday, 12 May 2010

Despite the fact there are no publicly available plans for this project, Stage One of construction of the East West Link has already commenced with "geological investigation" (i.e. drilling for soil and rock samples and testing for underground water) along the proposed alignment of the above/under/on ground road way. As spelt out in the Eddington Review of 2008 the freeway/tollway is likely to be open cut through Royal Park. It seems that there has been a total failure to responsibly and democratically consult the Victorian Public on their wishes in this matter as it affects public lands. The snap protest will be held near the reserve with the drilling rig at the corner of Neill and Canning Streets Carlton outside the Dan O’Connell Hotel starting at 12:30 pm. (Melways Map Reference 2BK4).

Protectors of Public Lands and Carlton Residents Association

Protectors of Public Lands Victoria and Carlton Residents Association have called a snap protest tomorrow at 12:30 pm at the drilling site on the Reserve outside the Dan O’Connell Hotel in Carlton as part of the ongoing campaign of opposition to the East-West Link and support for the Doncaster Rail Link.

No publicly available plans but construction has commenced!

Despite the fact there are no publicly available plans for this project, Stage One of construction of the East West Link has already commenced with "geological investigation" (i.e. drilling for soil and rock samples and testing for underground water) along the proposed alignment of the above/under/on ground road way. In today’s Age Mr Jim Betts, Secretary of the Department of Transport, is quoted as saying that “the tunnel would … transform Alexandra Parade from a choked inner-city arterial into a ''modern boulevard'', with improved priority for buses and bicycles and a better run for the four intersecting north-south tram routes.” Previous comments made by the State Government, however, indicate that the 4 lane tollway/freeway might not be a tunnel but an above ground "aerial roadway" along Princes Street and through the inner suburbs, akin to CitiLink, with compulsory acquisition of property along the route. As most of the traffic off the Eastern Freeway is headed north-south, the Baillieu Government has now decided there should be access/exits to the city at major intersections in Carlton and Parkville. As spelt out in the Eddington Review of 2008 the freeway/tollway is likely to be open cut through Royal Park.

Ian Bird

Ian Bird Transport and Traffic Spokesperson for the Carlton Residents’ Association explains:

Protection of Victorian Era heritage and general liveability in Carlton has been a primary goal of the Carlton Residents Association for decades. The prospect of East-West Link access ramps, elevated roadways and flyovers on Princes Street and massive traffic on North-South arterial roads to the CBD, fills residents with horror.”

“A rail line to Doncaster would move 100,000 people per day, the same as the destructive East-West Link, but at one tenth the cost. It would dramatically reduce traffic congestion. The fact that the Baillieu Government has caved into the influential roads lobby and has ignored the sustainable rail option is a scandal. The East-West Link fails all rational tests and must be abandoned before more public money is squandered on it. Public transport, not toll roads, is the way of the future.”

Julianne Bell

Julianne Bell of PPL VIC says:

“We are unwilling to stand by and see Melbourne, vaunted as the most liveable city in the world, destroyed by a Neanderthal Government intent on turning us back to the 1960’s by construction of monumental road works and on/off ramps to the city. Alliances of community groups have been battling proposals for extension of the Eastern Freeway for the past decade. Of particular concern is the fate of Royal Park, a unique bushland park and home of the Melbourne Zoo and State Netball and Hockey Centre. We do not want to see parkland plus sportsfields and wetlands carved up and gouged out by an open cut freeway/tollway. Our message is ‘Public Transport not Tollways’.”

The snap protest will be held near the reserve with the drilling rig at the corner of Neill and Canning Streets Carlton outside the Dan O’Connell Hotel starting at 12:30 pm. (Melways Map Reference 2BK4).

Parking is available in Neill Street, off Rathdowne Street.

Sources:
Media Release, Monday 20 August, 2012 from Protectors of Public Lands Victoria Inc. (PPL VIC) and Carlton Residents’ Association Inc. (CRA)

Contact:

Julianne Bell Protectors of Public Lands Victoria Inc. Mobile: 0408 022 408

Ian Bird Carlton Residents' Association Phone: 9347 1411