Statuses Amendment (Intensity of Development) Bill

Rise to make remarks in relation to this bill.

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: I rise to make some remarks in relation to the bill which has come from the House of Assembly. At the stage when it was addressed by our spokesperson, the member for Unley, he indicated support, which we still do provide for this. Notwithstanding some particular concerns that we have, we are sympathetic to the concept of it.

The bill essentially is attempting to make some assessment of what the carrying capacity is of particular areas and has arisen in respect of a specific development in the promoter's electorate. I can understand the concerns that have arisen that there could be a large number of dwellings located on sites that would be inappropriate. I have to say that I am surprised that there are not instruments under the planning process that could already address this, whether they are through zoning or other areas.

I think it is a bit rich of a government member to be promoting a bill in relation to this, given what particular communities in Liberal electorates have just undergone through the major development status that the government supported for Life Care for its aged-care facilities, where they clearly had developments that were much larger in scale than the adjoining properties. We do support the concerns in this particular area. However, we have received amendments which have just been filed today by the government.

The government is well aware that our process is that we have a joint party meeting every Monday and any amendments need to be considered at that and, therefore, they would have had to provide those to us prior to that meeting—the week before—in order for us to be able to give them due consideration and do our own due diligence. It is hard to see that the bill can progress under those circumstances because these just have not been given adequate notice; but we are supportive of the general concept of the bill.