Mrs PADGHAM-PURICH - 1994-10-05
The Minister for Lands, Housing and Local Government is probably expecting this question. Why does he intend to act as consent authority in relation to the Gunn Point peninsula proposal, thereby removing it from the consideration of the Litchfield Planning Authority and questioning the competence of the chairman, the core members and the local members of the Litchfield Planning Authority, and completely disregarding the views of the legally-appointed, enthusiastic, competent and popular Litchfield Shire Council?
ANSWER
Mr Speaker, I am amazed that the honourable member should ask this question. The issue of Gunn Point has been the subject of debate for a decade or so. A range of issues has been involved, not the least of which is the question of the development of Murramujuk township on Gunn Point. There are other considerations such as the serious negotiations that are under way in respect of the establishment of a satellite launching station on Gunn Point peninsula. Work is proceeding also on coastal zone management in conjunction with my ministerial colleagues and there is the question of the proposed marine national park. All of these matters impact on and around the Gunn Point area.
Whilst Gunn Point is in the municipality of the Litchfield Shire Council, it is certainly on the periphery of the council area and basically is undeveloped at this stage, apart from the Gunn Point Prison Farm and some weekender residential facilities in the Tree Point area. In fact, that may be outside of the area to which we are referring.
Mrs Padgham-Purich: Tree Point is outside it.
Mr HATTON: Mr Speaker, there is significant investment and development potential there. All of the land there is the property of the Northern Territory government.
Mrs Padgham-Purich: Not according to your notice in the paper.
Mr HATTON: We are working towards developing an overall strategic direction.
Mr Bailey: I did not think the Territory Land Corporation was in the control of a Northern Territory government minister?
Page 170
Mr HATTON: I was advised that it was Northern Territory government land. If it is Territory Land Corporation land, I would be in error and I will apologise if I have made that mistake.
In respect of the overall development of that area, obviously a proposal has been put to the Litchfield Area Planning Authority that the area be excluded from the Litchfield town plan and that separate land use objectives be developed for that area as a Gunn Point land use objectives proposal. There is a proposal at this stage that the consent authority be the Minister for Lands, Housing and Local Government rather than the Litchfield Division of the Northern Territory Planning Authority.
A couple of points need to be made for the member for Nelson. Firstly, there is nothing at all in this proposal that in any way affects adversely any of the rights of the Litchfield Shire Council. I remind honourable members that planning is not a local government function, but a Northern Territory government function. That particular planning authority has nominees who have been nominated ...
Mr Bailey: Selected by the minister.
Mr HATTON: ... to me, as the Minister for Lands, Housing and local Government, as members of that division of the Planning Authority. However, it is not a council function. I have written already to the Litchfield Shire Council advising particularly in respect of the township of Murrumujuk ...
Mr Bailey interjecting.
Mr HATTON: If you do not know what you are talking about, shut up!
Mr Speaker, I have written to the Litchfield Shire Council advising that, in respect of the township of Murrumujuk, there would be no adverse financial impact on the shire or the ratepayers of the shire. Any headworks, whether they be in respect of water, roads, power or other facilities, would be done at the Northern Territory government's expense, and the Territory government would accept responsibility for the maintenance of the roads in the area and even for garbage collection. The council would not be required to take over responsibility for roads there except by agreement and when roads are at a standard that is acceptable to the Litchfield Shire Council.
In respect of any planning proposals there, under the planning legislation enacted last year, even with the minister as consent authority, there has to be public advertising and the receipt of submissions. It differs from the process under the previous legislation. It now goes through the public submissions process. I have advised also that I will provide the Litchfield Shire Council with copies of any submissions relating to the plan and give it the opportunity to make comments and submissions in respect of any other submissions. In other words, the shire council will receive all information that it would receive if the Planning Authority itself were the consent authority. Further, I intend to discuss with the Litchfield Shire Council the matter of agreements in respect of rating in the area and similar matters. I have arranged a meeting with the shire councillors for next Monday afternoon to enable me to discuss with them a range of issues.
Page 171
I am able to assure honourable members that the proposal for Murrumujuk township has not gone on display. There is a proposal, but it cannot be released because it is subject to PER investigation by the Conservation Commission. Geotechnical studies have been carried out by consultants in the course of preparation of a provisional environmental report. That is under assessment by the Conservation Commission at this stage. When that is returned and the environmental issues have been appropriately dealt with, it is proposed that the proposal for subdivision will be put on public exhibition. Attached to that display will be a copy of the provisional environmental report as part of a subdivisional application. That willbe available for public comment and submissions through the planning process.
Obviously the proposal that has become the subject of ministerial consent will be discussed next Monday afternoon with the Litchfield Shire Council and, following that meeting, I will be in a much better position to advise on what agreements, arrangements or determinations will be finalised. I might add that public submissions on the proposal for me to take ministerial control on a separate plan close tomorrow. It was proposed at this stage to go to the Planning Authority on 20 October. That is not a fait accompli. It is a matter that will go before the Planning Authority for it to consider.
Page 172
ANSWER
Mr Speaker, I am amazed that the honourable member should ask this question. The issue of Gunn Point has been the subject of debate for a decade or so. A range of issues has been involved, not the least of which is the question of the development of Murramujuk township on Gunn Point. There are other considerations such as the serious negotiations that are under way in respect of the establishment of a satellite launching station on Gunn Point peninsula. Work is proceeding also on coastal zone management in conjunction with my ministerial colleagues and there is the question of the proposed marine national park. All of these matters impact on and around the Gunn Point area.
Whilst Gunn Point is in the municipality of the Litchfield Shire Council, it is certainly on the periphery of the council area and basically is undeveloped at this stage, apart from the Gunn Point Prison Farm and some weekender residential facilities in the Tree Point area. In fact, that may be outside of the area to which we are referring.
Mrs Padgham-Purich: Tree Point is outside it.
Mr HATTON: Mr Speaker, there is significant investment and development potential there. All of the land there is the property of the Northern Territory government.
Mrs Padgham-Purich: Not according to your notice in the paper.
Mr HATTON: We are working towards developing an overall strategic direction.
Mr Bailey: I did not think the Territory Land Corporation was in the control of a Northern Territory government minister?
Page 170
Mr HATTON: I was advised that it was Northern Territory government land. If it is Territory Land Corporation land, I would be in error and I will apologise if I have made that mistake.
In respect of the overall development of that area, obviously a proposal has been put to the Litchfield Area Planning Authority that the area be excluded from the Litchfield town plan and that separate land use objectives be developed for that area as a Gunn Point land use objectives proposal. There is a proposal at this stage that the consent authority be the Minister for Lands, Housing and Local Government rather than the Litchfield Division of the Northern Territory Planning Authority.
A couple of points need to be made for the member for Nelson. Firstly, there is nothing at all in this proposal that in any way affects adversely any of the rights of the Litchfield Shire Council. I remind honourable members that planning is not a local government function, but a Northern Territory government function. That particular planning authority has nominees who have been nominated ...
Mr Bailey: Selected by the minister.
Mr HATTON: ... to me, as the Minister for Lands, Housing and local Government, as members of that division of the Planning Authority. However, it is not a council function. I have written already to the Litchfield Shire Council advising particularly in respect of the township of Murrumujuk ...
Mr Bailey interjecting.
Mr HATTON: If you do not know what you are talking about, shut up!
Mr Speaker, I have written to the Litchfield Shire Council advising that, in respect of the township of Murrumujuk, there would be no adverse financial impact on the shire or the ratepayers of the shire. Any headworks, whether they be in respect of water, roads, power or other facilities, would be done at the Northern Territory government's expense, and the Territory government would accept responsibility for the maintenance of the roads in the area and even for garbage collection. The council would not be required to take over responsibility for roads there except by agreement and when roads are at a standard that is acceptable to the Litchfield Shire Council.
In respect of any planning proposals there, under the planning legislation enacted last year, even with the minister as consent authority, there has to be public advertising and the receipt of submissions. It differs from the process under the previous legislation. It now goes through the public submissions process. I have advised also that I will provide the Litchfield Shire Council with copies of any submissions relating to the plan and give it the opportunity to make comments and submissions in respect of any other submissions. In other words, the shire council will receive all information that it would receive if the Planning Authority itself were the consent authority. Further, I intend to discuss with the Litchfield Shire Council the matter of agreements in respect of rating in the area and similar matters. I have arranged a meeting with the shire councillors for next Monday afternoon to enable me to discuss with them a range of issues.
Page 171
I am able to assure honourable members that the proposal for Murrumujuk township has not gone on display. There is a proposal, but it cannot be released because it is subject to PER investigation by the Conservation Commission. Geotechnical studies have been carried out by consultants in the course of preparation of a provisional environmental report. That is under assessment by the Conservation Commission at this stage. When that is returned and the environmental issues have been appropriately dealt with, it is proposed that the proposal for subdivision will be put on public exhibition. Attached to that display will be a copy of the provisional environmental report as part of a subdivisional application. That willbe available for public comment and submissions through the planning process.
Obviously the proposal that has become the subject of ministerial consent will be discussed next Monday afternoon with the Litchfield Shire Council and, following that meeting, I will be in a much better position to advise on what agreements, arrangements or determinations will be finalised. I might add that public submissions on the proposal for me to take ministerial control on a separate plan close tomorrow. It was proposed at this stage to go to the Planning Authority on 20 October. That is not a fait accompli. It is a matter that will go before the Planning Authority for it to consider.
Page 172
Last updated: 09 Aug 2016