Thursday, 23 February 2023

Bills

Building and Planning Legislation Amendment Bill 2022

Second reading

Debate resumed on motion of Lizzie Blandthorn:

That the bill be now read a second time.

David DAVIS (Southern Metropolitan) (10:04): I am pleased to rise and make a contribution to the Building and Planning Legislation Amendment Bill 2022 and to indicate that the opposition will not oppose this bill. There are some matters in this bill that we strongly support and there are other matters that we have some concerns with, but I note that the government has, in discussion with Mr Hodgett and also in discussion with a number of stakeholders, indicated that a number of steps will be taken which assuage some of our concerns. But let me just step through this bill. It is designed to deliver a number of different changes, and it is perhaps important for the chamber to know that there was a similar bill in the last Parliament which lapsed.

It lapsed because the government became gun-shy of a number of draconian and unfortunate provisions that had been incorporated into that earlier act last year. I can indicate, for example, that the changes that were proposed to the Architects Registration Board of Victoria in that act have been removed from this bill, and that is a step that we support, because those changes were wrong and unconscionable. I know, for example, that I surveyed architects across the state and had more than 4000 responses in fact overwhelmingly pointing to the foolishness of the government’s attempt to nobble the architecture profession – to strip architects from the architects registration board – and this was clearly an attempt to assert greater departmental and other dominance over the architecture profession. I for one see the strong value in that profession and see the need for that profession to be as far as possible a strong, self-governing profession that is able to protect the community as its primary aim and ensure that standards are high. I am just not sure that stripping architects from the architects registration board, as the government was proposing to do, was the best way to guarantee quality architecture and a strong profession in this state. So we strongly oppose those matters, and as I say, the response was overwhelming as I began surveying the profession, first in my area and then much more widely, to see the huge number of people who had strong views about this matter – architects but others as well had very strong views on the matter. So we welcome the removal of that matter.

But the bill itself, as I say, contains a number of different provisions, and it is important to note that it amends a number of different acts. The Building Act 1993, the Architects Act 1991, the Surveying Act 2004 and the Planning and Environment Act 1987 are all amended by this bill, and I will have something to say about those bits of the bill as we go forward. The amendments to the Building Act relate to automatic mutual recognition of building practitioners, building employees and plumbers who are registered or licensed in other jurisdictions and make a number of other small amendments. The Architects Act 1991 is amended in relation to the automatic mutual recognition of architects who are registered or licensed in other jurisdictions and a number of other miscellaneous acts. The Surveying Act is amended in terms of the automatic and mutual recognition of surveyors who are licensed or registered in other jurisdictions. It also amends the Planning and Environment Act, and this is in relation particularly to the protection of green wedges and distinctive area landscapes.

It is perhaps worth me just stepping through these aspects of the bill. As I said, the previous bill has gone. The offensive provisions to the architects bill have gone, but there are still a number of other matters that the architects wanted to engage on, and the government has given certain commitments to the architects, which I will put on the record in a moment. One important aspect of the bill – but it is an overstated aspect – is the alleged further protection of the metropolitan green wedge land by introducing objectives for green wedge land and a requirement for councils to prepare and review green wedge management plans. This is the sort of mechanism that is associated in the act. It seeks to streamline the process for endorsing a statement of planning policy for a distinctive area and landscape. These are important steps, and we support the distinctive landscape concept and the need to lay out certain areas of the state as distinctive landscapes that deserve protection, with proper recognition of the uniqueness of some of those zones along the Great Ocean Road. We have been very keen to see greater recognition in the Dandenongs and the Macedon Ranges and so forth and led the way on each of those areas. Indeed it was a series of amendments to a planning bill in this chamber in the last term that actually led the way with some of the matters around distinctive areas and significant landscapes. So these amendments that were put in this chamber, which were opposed by the government, certainly signalled very clearly our view that there needed to be a proper regime for these distinctive landscapes.

In terms of the green wedge issues, I want to just be very clear with the chamber today. There is a history to this, and these green wedges were originally declared under the Hamer government. They have strongly been supported by this side of politics for many, many decades, and we have worked hard to try and keep the green wedges protected. So this tiny little accretion of process that has been added here is not opposed in any way, but we do not think that this actually adds terribly much in actual fact. Ms Deeming has been in contact with many of her local councils, including Hume in particular, and has become very concerned that inside green wedge areas the government seeks to dump toxic spoil. These steps are far from adequate, and although again this small change is not opposed in any way, we should not overstate what it actually does.

So the government whilst talking the talk of green wedge protection actually dumps toxic spoil in green wedge land and actually is in the process – for example, in the green wedge in the south-east – of removing the longstanding work on developing the chain of parks in the City of Kingston. This is something that goes back to 1994 under the Kennett government and the work that was done then by Rob Maclellan as the Minister for Planning and the implementation in effect of long-term green wedge plans, with a big chain of parks, with recreational areas, with tree planting, with the reservation of land over the long haul. The City of Kingston was very committed to that, and the government allegedly was very committed to that prior to its announcements on the Suburban Rail Loop. Then out of the blue with the Suburban Rail Loop came a set of announcements that said, ‘Oh no, the area that was set aside for the chain of parks, the area that was set aside for new recreational facilities for the south-east’ – a big and welcome development where there is a shortage of parks and ovals and related fixtures – ‘suddenly that is all to be turned on its head.’ Thirty years of planning policy, 30 years of work by the council, the state government and the community, sporting groups and others was just turned on its head in one day by Jacinta Allan.

They came forward. It is important for the chamber to understand actually what happened here. The announcement came forward: ‘We’re going to build a train stabling and maintenance yard in the middle of the green wedge land.’ There was no proper consultation and no agreement from the local community. I went down there the day this was announced and actually stood with a lot of the local people to try and defend them and to say actually this is their area, this is their green wedge, this is their chain of parks, this is for the south-east, this is protection for a long period into the future but being tipped on its head. I see Mr Tarlamis listening carefully here. He knows the story of this, and I would welcome him and other members of the Labor Party from the south-east coming with me to visit the Move the Train Yard Group and actually sit down with them around the kitchen table to thrash out some issues and some alternatives.

This process was so bad that the minimal consultation with the City of Kingston has been controlled by a gag order. They said to Kingston, ‘Look, we’ll talk to you a little bit, but you are not to consult with your community. You sign the gag order or we will not discuss anything at all with you.’ The council signed the gag order, councillors signed the gag order and officials at the council signed the gag order, which then prevented them discussing the proposal with their local community and actually putting out the maps and showing what was actually proposed. The community has slowly worked its way through this and become increasingly agitated about what the government intends to do: tear up the green wedge and build a stabling yard there. In a way it is an industrial activity that is going to be put in there – let us be clear what is going on – and it is completely and utterly unsuitable for a green wedge zone. This is not a legacy industry in a green wedge zone, this is a new one being put in there by council.

I should say we have FOIs on this, and the City of Kingston – Labor lackeys to the last – have fought that all the way. There will be further hearings on certain documents relating to consultation. But the City of Kingston has not done what it should have done on these matters. It actually should have fought for its community rather than rolling over and having its tummy tickled by Jacinta Allan and her lackeys in the Suburban Rail Loop Authority.

The idea that consultation is to be blocked by these gag orders is something that I think most people think is wrong and most councillors know to be wrong, but the government is using these everywhere. Whether it is on level crossings, the Suburban Rail Loop or major rail projects, they are using these gag orders everywhere to cut down the consultation and to cut the community out of these discussions. So when the government talks positively about green wedges, we say, ‘Good.’ But actually we think they should be judged by their actions not by their words on this, and their actions are very much to crimp and destroy, to wind back the green wedge lands and to leave less green wedge heritage than was there before, with new industrial-scale activities in the green wedge lands.

That is actually what Labor is doing. That is what they should be judged by. That is how the community should see the soft words that are in this bill. They should see it in the light of the actions of the government in damaging the green wedges, destroying the chain of parklands and destroying the integrity of the chain of parklands. They are going to take a bite out of the middle of it. This is pretty bad stuff that we are seeing from this government, and I think history will judge them quite harshly on these matters. If you want to build a suburban rail loop, there are ways to do it. There are alternative sites for stabling. There are alternative sites for the maintenance and steps that need to be undertaken, and the government should have investigated those. The community was prepared to put forward alternative sites, and indeed they have been closed down in that process. So on this green wedge aspect I think we should be quite clear what is going on.

The Australian Institute of Architects in relation to this bill was worried about the additional annual fees. The institute identified the risk that architects may be levied a second annual fee that is additional to their annual registration renewal. A second issue relates to the maintaining of information about criminal sanctions on the register and web publications. The institute identified the risk of a disproportionate measure of making publicly available specified information about criminal sanctions and the offending history of an architect for no longer than five years that may not be relevant to the public interest. So if it is a matter that is relevant to their practice as an architect, I think the view is that that is fair enough. But if it is quite a separate matter – a road offence or something of that nature – it is not directly relevant to their practice as an architect, and in that sense I think the architects were raising a reasonable point. I would welcome from the minister assurances that those commitments given to the architecture association, the Royal Australian Institute of Architects, and others will be honoured. So I would welcome some commentary in Hansard from the government or from the minister, either in summing up and/or in committee. I do flag that we will take the bill into committee. It is not my intention to amend the bill and it is not my intention to drag out the committee stage, but I simply want to ask a few salient questions relating to the purposes clause when we get to that point.

I also wanted to say something about the issues of the total fill that can be introduced to land in the green wedge zone. Maybe the government in committee will be prepared to give some indication about the total volume of toxic spoil that it proposes to dump in green wedge land. I think the community would want to see some proper indication on this. Many land uses in the green wedge area, including agricultural uses, are dependent on the clean, green aspect. That is incompatible, I would put to the government, with the presence of a dumping program for toxic spoil – at the moment from the West Gate Tunnel, but in the future from other projects. Potentially the Suburban Rail Loop is also a source of toxic spoil, particularly from the south-east, where some areas are former industrial areas. There is at least a significant probability that some of this spoil removed from tunnels will have a level of toxicity that would concern many people.

On the distinctive areas matter, I think it is probably important to put on the record that the Planning Institute of Australia (PIA) has stated:

… there is nothing in the bill that we believe to be insupportable or concerning.

And we would agree with that, now that those architecture matters are dealt with.

The changes are minor, and their affect will facilitate the approval of the SPPs – Statement of Planning Policies in Distinctive Areas and Landscape.

The PIA also supported the requirement to prepare green wedge management plans. As I said, we are happy with these minor changes, but we think the government is talking out of the side of its mouth in the sense that whilst it is talking warmly about the green wedges it is dumping toxic spoil and proposing to tear up the long-established chain of parks in the City of Kingston. I still shudder and find that very, very concerning.

The communication to the opposition through the Shadow Minister for Planning David Hodgett, who has done a very good job on this bill, looks at the costs for insurance checks. It is probably just worth putting on the record some of the points here that were provided to the opposition by AIA and the Association of Consulting Architects Australia.

Costs incurred by regulators to conduct annual insurance checks for Victorian registered practitioners are covered by existing fees, for example annual renewal fees. If a fee for the examination of required insurance is introduced, it will be set at cost recovery levels and a commensurate reduction … made to the existing fee recovering costs … This … will ensure registered Victorian practitioners are not paying twice for the inspection of insurance.

We welcome that commitment. Another commitment was made relating to the criminal sanctions provision:

Under the mutual recognition act, if requested by a relevant regulator in another state, ARBV is required to share information relating to any civil, criminal or disciplinary action taken against a Victorian architect who wishes to work under ADR elsewhere. Additionally, a person who is subject to criminal, civil, or disciplinary proceedings in relation to an occupation that covers the activity in any state is excluded from ADR and it is up to the ARBV to ensure interstate architects working in Victoria under ADR are not subject to these proceedings. Creating a power to record details about criminal sanctions, and include them in the Register of Architects, is necessary to enable the ARBV to acquit both these responsibilities. The Bill provides discretion to the ARBV about which criminal or disciplinary sanctions against an architect it records in the register. As a result, the Bill does not require … these requirements on regulators, the Mutual Recognition Act does not define criminal action or criminal proceedings. Regulators have been working with their counterparts across jurisdictions to understand their obligations under the Act, including arriving at common understandings on the meaning of criminal action and proceedings. Due to these ambiguities arising from Commonwealth legislation, the Bill provides the ARBV with flexibility and discretion to interpret what constitutes a criminal sanction and whether it chooses to record it on the Register of Architects. Given the context in which these amendments are made, it is expected that criminal sanctions will only relate to crimes connected to a person’s work as an architect. It is intended, for example, that any criminal conviction or finding of guilt in a criminal proceeding for an offence against the Architects Act would form part of the meaning of ‘criminal sanction’ in … the bill. These amendments are not related to the publication of information on the register.

That is from the office of Sonya Kilkenny, so we would welcome a conclusion of those matters by the minister, as I said, in the chamber later. I think the points made here by the Victorian chapter of the Australian Institute of Architects and David Wagner in particular are very reasonable to the opposition. We see the logic in what they have said, and we are pleased that the government has given some additional commitments.

When it comes to the Planning and Environment Act, my concerns are now well on the record in this chamber that in fact there are real concerns about the operation of the act. I think the Operation Clara report, which was released yesterday by IBAC, points to real weaknesses in the act and in the conflict-of-interest matters surrounding the act. It is worth just putting on the record in the context of the Planning and Environment Act a number of the concerns and what the investigation found:

IBAC’s investigation found Mr Theophanous:

• Lobbied ministers and departmental officers in favour of AEC’s proposed East Werribee project and failed to:

• declare a conflict of interest in relation to these activities when matters concerning AEC were discussed at VPA board meetings (even after AEC commenced litigation against the state of Victoria and the VPA in relation to the East Werribee project) …

It also found he failed to:

• register AEC as a client on the lobbyists register.

It found he:

• Endeavoured to use his position as a VPA director –

a Victorian Planning Authority director –

to:

• obtain an invitation for an AEC representative to attend an official VPA function, and

• advance his private lobbying business by indicating to clients he had access to staff and information within the VPA that would assist with their matters.

• Sought payments from the AEC or associated entities

• In lieu of direct payment for his lobbying activities, obtained other benefits from the AEC and a special adviser to the AEC, namely donations (including in-kind support) to his daughter’s 2018 campaign for the State electorate of Northcote.

This is pretty wild stuff. You have actually got a former minister of the Crown appointed by the government to authorities – and I see he stepped aside from State Trustees in the recent days too. But his work at the VPA, feathering his own nest, scooping out money for his daughter’s campaign – perhaps, it would seem, unknown to her, but still undertaking some of these matters – I think is very concerning. The report goes on at page 13:

These lobbying activities also conflicted with Mr Theophanous’ duties as a VPA director. For instance, on 28 February 2018, the day of the planned dinner meeting with the Minister for Finance, Mr Theophanous attended a VPA Risk and Audit Committee … where it was noted that the CEO of the VPA would provide an update to the board on what actions the VPA should take if the government decided not to proceed with the East Werribee sale proposal. Minutes of the 28 February 2018 meeting indicate that Mr Theophanous was in attendance and did not declare a conflict. The update was provided to the board at its meeting on 14 March 2018, which was also attended by Mr Theophanous (who again, did not declare a conflict of interest).

Again, this is very, very concerning stuff.

… Mr Theophanous sent a text message to AEC representatives A and B stating ‘I have had the most important conversation with the Treasurer’. When asked about this comment in examinations, Mr Theophanous stated:

[The] Treasurer … is a very close friend … I try to give him advice … as a friend … in the case of this particular proposal … it’s difficult for me to recall the exact nature of our conversations, but let’s assume that there were conversations around this question in the West … [and] how the West of Melbourne could be developed further.

So he has dumped the Treasurer right in this. The Treasurer has got a significant role on some of these cabinet committees that are making the decisions, and yet he is lobbying him. He also met with the Minister for Priority Precincts and the Treasurer:

… this week and another Minister that may be able to help. Will keep you informed …

says Theo when he is sending a text message to AEC representatives. These are again very, very concerning matters. He goes on to talk to the Minister for Jobs, Innovation and Trade:

I really think that the decision to terminate AEC will have serious consequences for the Govt our relationship with China and Tim. If there is any way to stall it to allow some serious but limited negotiation we should do so.

I mean, this is direct intervention into government decision-making in an extraordinary way. Leaving aside the merits or otherwise of the proposal itself, these are deeply concerning. The Australian Education City proposal in the west – I mean, that whole East Werribee precinct has been left high and dry by the government’s decisions. These are just very, very concerning points. The Operation Clara report goes on about lobbying on public boards:

… directors can help prevent conflicts of interest similar to those observed in Operation Clara; Mr Theophanous was able to serve as a director on the VPA board while representing the interests of a number of private developers, which can increase the risk of conflicts of interest (both real and perceived), which can in turn undermine the integrity of the board.

…

IBAC considers that for the duration of their appointment, public entity board directors should not engage in lobbying activities – paid or unpaid – in relation to any matter that relates to the functions of the public entity, and that this requirement should be reiterated in the codes of conduct for both lobbyists and public entity board directors.

I actually compliment IBAC on this extraordinary report and on the work that they have done. I see the extraordinary appendix A: ‘Theo Theophanous natural justice response’, which takes from page 32 to page 58 of the report. He has put a counsel opinion in there, which is sort of fanciful reading too. I read that closely, but I do not necessarily want to go through the legal principles of that just now.

I think the Planning and Environment Act is a very important foundational act. It is one that this bill amends, and it is one that has got to be strengthened to stop this sort of activity happening. The government’s poor planning process as outlined with respect to green wedges, for example, in the south-east, is a case study in how to get poor planning outcomes – a case study in bad process that leads to poor planning outcomes. You do not protect the green wedge by leaving the Planning and Environment Act open to corrupt lobbyists and crooked shysters of every type who are pushing their own barrow for money or for other matters. So we on this side of the chamber certainly believe that those points have got to be cleaned up. I think the Clara matter is an important one. As I said, we do not oppose this bill, but we do seek some assurances in committee.

Tom McINTOSH (Eastern Victoria) (10:34): I rise to contribute to the debate on the Building and Planning Legislation Amendment Bill 2022. This bill is an important step forward in the government’s environmental stewardship by strengthening legislative protection for Melbourne’s green wedges. It was great to see so many young Victorians up in the gallery before, because I hope this bill will benefit them and future generations of Victorians to come. Green wedges are the non-urban areas of metropolitan Melbourne that lie outside the urban growth boundary. There are 12 designated green wedges that touch 17 local government areas which form a ring around the city of Melbourne. These wedges form the boundary of our city and ensure that we protect cultural heritage, the natural environment and agriculture from urban development. Each green wedge area is unique, and that is why each needs its own management plan.

In my electorate alone the landscape ranges from the Mornington Peninsula coastline to the fertile, flat land surrounding Western Port Bay and to the highly scenic countryside of the Yarra Valley. About one-third of the total green wedge area is public land, including national parks, other parks, reserves and closed, protected water catchments. The government is committed to protecting Melbourne’s green wedges for current and future generations. This bill articulates the government’s objectives for green wedge land and introduces a legislative requirement for municipal councils to prepare and review green wedge management plans. The bill will also enable the Minister for Planning to issue directions in relation to the preparation and content of green wedge management plans, which will provide improved guidance to councils on the structure, form and content of green wedge management plans.

In my contribution to this discussion I want to focus on one of the most unique areas in Victoria, the Mornington Peninsula, and the importance of the green wedge to the local environment, economy and community. I also want to highlight the importance of other initiatives this government is undertaking to protect the environment. Protecting the green wedges is essential, but we also need to ensure that there are other wildlife sanctuaries and corridors of habitat between these areas so that wildlife can safely move around to increase their resilience; ensure there is access to green spaces for physical activity, which protects our mental health; control the products we use so that green wedges and the environment in general are not polluted, specifically by single-use plastics; improve recycling; reduce our emissions; and ensure sustainable development, including through excellent public transport provision. In my electorate of Eastern Victoria green wedges are an important planning, agricultural, tourism and environmental issue. The Mornington Peninsula is a designated green wedge, and I know that this is of vital importance to both the local council and the community. Outside of the coastal development on both the Port Phillip Bay side and the Western Port Bay side the majority of the centre of the Mornington Peninsula is a designated green wedge. In terms of the economy, within the green wedge there is hundreds of millions of dollars worth of agricultural production and further hundreds of millions of dollars worth of tourist attractions.

But there are also important community activities. I want to highlight just a couple of the special visits I have made to this area and the types of activities that protecting the green wedge supports. I visited the Mount Martha wildlife sanctuary, known as the Briars, where there has been so much work done to protect our native mammals and their habitat from foxes, cats and rabbits. We are investing an additional $1.5 million to deliver 40 more hectares of sanctuary, with kilometres of connecting pathways and boardwalks for visitors to explore. A big thanks to Mornington Peninsula Shire Council’s mayor Steve Holland, deputy mayor Debra Mar, CEO John Baker and manager of community facilities and precincts Rebecca Levy for showing me around. This investment not only ensures a beautiful, natural space for all of us to share and enjoy but we have a bigger protected area that sees the return of our bandicoots, bettongs and potoroos. The Briars is also home to the Food for Change Mornington Peninsula farm, which opened in 2021 and grows fresh food for those in need locally. The project will be a huge boost to local tourism, which in turn will benefit the local economy, with construction expected to be finished in 2024.

I also want to talk about Sages Cottage farm in Baxter. Wallara provides life and work pathways to 70 people with intellectual disabilities on a beautiful historic site set on 38 acres, with a heritage homestead that is an incredible building to walk through. I would like to acknowledge all the hard work that Phil, Zara and the team have done to create this unique space, which offers such innovative opportunities for members of our community. Those I met have access to supported employment, further education via accredited courses and hands-on training to become incredible cooks – whose food I can tell you is delicious – baristas and gardeners. Wallara also offers retail training with the Wallara shop, media production and a whole range of other activities for those who are engaged. I met Maddy, Chris and Terry, and they told me about how much they love their jobs – and the smiles on their faces were testament to that. Wallara’s vision with Sages Cottage to normalise disability and set a new benchmark for inclusive tourism on the Mornington Peninsula, and to create paid jobs for people on and off the farm with its growing list of supporters, is truly fantastic. I look forward to my next visit and continue to support their great work there – another great example of what can be done in our wedges.

It takes a village to raise a child, and that is the motto of a local children’s service, Tyabb Village Children’s Centre. Tyabb Village is family-run and operates a fantastic childcare centre and supports local families. The village offers long day care – well, soon to be three- and four-year-old kinder – home-cooked meals and a focus on outdoor education and getting the kids out into their community. Lavinia and Richard have a big plan to start a farm kinder program to extend their outdoor education passion and philosophy. It is about getting all those local kids out there, getting dirty hands amongst animals, in the puddles, in the mud, in the grass and all these things, which is what this bill is doing, to ensure that these families are enjoying not only a connected community but their local natural spaces. The 2.7-acre site will host a barn-style learning centre as well as a working farm, which is the perfect backdrop for building skills and connecting kids to animals, nature and themselves.

The children at Tyabb village are already environmentally aware and some are even activists. The flow-on effects of this are that the kids go home and advocate for changes in the home, like setting up compost, using less plastic and soft plastic recycling. The same applies to food. Richard cooks delicious, nutritious meals, and the kids try lots of different foods and learn about healthy eating, including learning valuable life skills by cooking with their peers. All this knowledge goes home with the kids at the end of the day. With the farm kinder, kids will know where the food comes from and how it can be produced sustainably.

More families have smaller or even no backyards, and children have less access to the outdoors than in past generations. Already the kids go down to the paddock classroom every Wednesday, and when they come back they are relaxed, happy and calm. There is nothing like watching kids in gumboots with mud on their hands splash and play in a puddle. I visited the site, and this is exactly the kind of holistic early education that will build connected, resilient kids for the future. I could not be a bigger supporter of the work they are doing, and I have been working closely with Lavinia and Richard to advocate for funding for these amazing plans. These are just some of the amazing activities taking place in the green wedge, and while they are small, grassroots examples, it is clear that legislation like this protects the natural environment around our suburbs and supports this activity.

Spending time in green spaces is a key protective factor for our mental health. In fact this was the finding of the landmark Royal Commission into Victoria’s Mental Health System. Physical activity and access to green space is listed as a proven protective factor that keeps us well and prevents mental illness for children, for teenagers and for adults. If we want to continue to improve the mental health and resilience of our kids and our communities, we need to continue to provide them this access close to home. This is what protecting green wedges does. But the green wedge legislation is only one of many steps this government is taking to protect the environment. Just this month we banned the use of several single-use plastic items. It is one thing to set aside the land for green space and it is another to transform our economy and our way of thinking about sustainability to protect the land and the water that flows through it. This ban saw the end of single-use plastic drinking straws, cutlery, plates, drink stirrers, cotton bud sticks and expanded polystyrene food and drink containers in Victoria. The ban means cleaner streets and towns, cleaner land to support our produce and cleaner rivers for our drinking water and recreation, including in the green wedge. It means less emissions and more jobs in recycling, and I will come back to the importance of recycling.

Of course the environment is about connection. It is not enough to have one fabulous corner of the state set aside for a national park and concrete the rest of it. The environment needs diversity, both geographically and in terms of vegetation and climate, to be resilient to our future challenges. This means that green wedges provide important areas in addition to the wildlife sanctuaries we continue to improve across the state. We need to continue to protect these areas and the corridors for wildlife between them, along rivers and roads and across private land so that birds and mammals can make the journey from one habitat area to another, and of course continuing to green our suburbs will help with this as well.

A current initiative is the huge investment in protecting Wilsons Prom, which is also in my electorate of Eastern Victoria. The Andrews Labor government is improving the visitor experience at the much-loved Wilsons Promontory National Park, including upgrades to the Telegraph Saddle trail to connect Tidal River and Mount Oberon. Consultants are now being sought to design, develop and investigate the $23 million upgrade, including a revamp of the visitor and education centre at Tidal River. The on-ground works are expected to be completed by the end of 2024. The local community and visitors to the area will have an opportunity to provide feedback on the project later this year. In addition, the Labor government is delivering new accommodation options and amenities and upgrades to the popular Tidal River campground, and these are also being funded thanks to the $105.6 million Victoria’s Great Outdoors program. Another tender process was recently opened for a 10-kilometre predator-proof fence that will create a biodiversity sanctuary that will keep destructive species out of the park and support the recovery and re-establishment of native plants, animals and habitats.

The upgrade and improvement works will be informed by consultation with the traditional owners, ensuring the area’s Aboriginal cultural heritage and environmental values are protected. Protecting green wedges adds to the work we are doing to protect the environment in other areas of the state and further adds to the resilience of our native vegetation and wildlife. To protect the environment it is of course also vital that we decarbonise our economy. The government has world-beating renewable energy and emission reduction targets. We have committed to a 95 per cent renewable energy target by 2035, net zero emissions by 2045, and 75 to 80 per cent emission reductions by 2035, and we have put in place a whole range of policies to get there.

I am excited by the jobs this clean energy revolution will bring to regional areas, including the Mornington Peninsula. I rose in this chamber just two days ago to give an update on the exciting work happening in offshore wind in Eastern Victoria, a development that will lower emissions, power millions of homes with clean energy and provide thousands of jobs. This government is supporting project proponents and working with the federal government on getting this important industry going in Australia, and of course there is a massive and exciting public investment in renewable energy coming through the State Electricity Commission, better known as the SEC, a policy that was extremely popular with the public in November. The government is showing leadership on this energy transition by stepping in and investing directly in generation to give power back to the public in the energy space to ensure reliability, lower prices and jobs.

The transition to renewable energy also provides huge opportunities to move further towards a circular economy. Also in the electorate of Eastern Victoria last year I visited a groundbreaking new business setting up in Kilmany in the Wellington shire. Elecsome are building a solar panel upcycling plant. The Victorian government is contributing $500,000 towards Elecsome’s $3 million-plus investment in a new plant to upcycle solar panels. Rather than the current practice of burying panels as waste or storing them in warehouses, the site will soon employ 30 people to convert glass to concrete, recycle silver, copper, metal, silicon and much more. Research from Melbourne Uni and RMIT has enabled this technology leap. Wellington shire deserve a big shout-out for their support on the practical location of this groundbreaking project. I cannot wait to return to see Elecsome’s incredible processing centre in full operation. This is just one local example of the huge opportunities that exist in our transition to a more sustainable economy. All of these policies are connected through their commitment to protecting Victoria’s environment, and we know that making meaningful steps towards a circular and sustainable economy are very important to the community.

Another crucial factor in sustainable development is the transport sector. This is because of emissions but also because of how public transport determines the layouts of our cities and suburbs. This government is making huge investments in public transport that will allow for a higher density of development in the right places rather than overdevelopment of our green wedges. There is the Metro Tunnel so people can easily travel around our cities. There is the Suburban Rail Loop so people can easily travel around our middle suburbs, which will totally transform suburban development in Melbourne.

David Davis: Is this a transport bill suddenly?

Tom McINTOSH: It is looking at our community as a whole – environment, circular economy, sustainable –

David Davis interjected.

Tom McINTOSH: Excellent. The bill is an important step forward in the government’s environmental stewardship by strengthening legislative protection for Melbourne’s green wedges. Green wedges are the non-urban areas of metropolitan Melbourne that lie outside the urban growth boundary. There are 12 designated green wedges that touch 17 local government areas which form the ring around the city. I focus on the importance of the green wedge to the economy and the community of the Mornington Peninsula in highlighting how this work connects to the whole range of environmental stewardship that the government is undertaking. These policies are accelerating our move to a sustainable and circular economy.

Jacinta ERMACORA (Western Victoria) (10:49): The Building and Planning Legislation Amendment Bill 2022 improves the operation of the building and planning systems and delivers the government’s 2018 election commitment to strengthen legislative protection of Melbourne’s green wedges. The bill strengthens legislative protection of Melbourne’s green wedges, streamlines the endorsement process for distinctive area and landscape, supports the implementation of automatic mutual recognition in Victoria and clarifies the power to issue restricted plumbing work licences for private plumbing work.

In relation to green wedges, Melbourne’s 12 green wedges cover the areas just outside Melbourne’s urban growth boundary and provide an essential break between the intensive urban development along the growth corridors. This land is critical to our economy and Melbourne’s food production, contributing around $5.79 billion in economic activity and supporting roughly 16,500 jobs. But it is also home to some of the world’s best wine destinations, parks and wetlands, and our green wedges ensure that the character and landscape of communities along the urban growth boundary are protected as Melbourne’s population inevitably grows. This bill strengthens protections for green wedge land by enshrining the government’s objectives for this land in legislation, acquitting a 2018 election commitment. It also introduces a legislative requirement for municipal councils to prepare and review green wedge management plans. The Minister for Planning will be able to issue directions in relation to the preparation and content of green wedge management plans, providing improved guidance to councils on their structure, form and content. This will better protect Melbourne’s green wedges against inappropriate development.

Labor is committed to protecting the outstanding environmental, cultural and economic significance of the Macedon Ranges, Bass Coast, Surf Coast and Bellarine Peninsula, and that is exactly what we are doing. These areas have been declared to be distinctive areas and landscapes requiring the development of a statement of planning policy, a 50-year plan for protecting the unique features and providing certainty for housing, tourism and infrastructure investment. These requirements are incredibly useful in anticipating the long-term needs of communities. It is certainly something that is required and commonly undertaken in the water industry, where 50-year supply demand strategies for water supply are developed and renewed on a regular basis. These urban water strategies, as they are called, anticipate population growth, take into account climate change and look at the needs and aspirations of the community. In doing so, they position every community very clearly and factually support them in the area of water supply. These 50-year plans for protecting unique features in this area will do the same.

The state planning policies have already come into effect for Macedon Ranges and Surf Coast, and Bellarine and Bass Coast are currently going through the process. The state planning policy requires the endorsement of public entities like water corporations, but at the moment there is no set time frame in which they have to provide endorsement. This is definitely a very good thing, because it is a very good thing to have integrated planning that takes account of all the different perspectives that need to be taken into account, including community, but it is not good if these inputs take a very long time. This experience has repeatedly shown that it is difficult to prepare, consult on and obtain the endorsement and approval of a statement of planning policy within the time frame specified in the Planning and Environment Act 1987. The bill streamlines the process for endorsement by responsible entities for a statement of planning policy for a distinctive area and landscape, requiring endorsement within 28 days. Streamlining the state planning policy endorsement process will remove barriers to finalising the state planning policy, ensuring that we have clear plans in place that protect the features and the landscapes of Victoria’s distinctive areas.

This bill also addresses automatic mutual recognition. Victoria has adopted automatic mutual recognition, enabling individuals registered or licensed for an occupation in an Australian state or territory to work in another participating state or territory using their home state registration or licence. This bill introduces a drivers licence mutual recognition model. The bill makes changes to the Building Act 1993, Architects Act 1991 and Surveying Act 2004 to strengthen consumer protections under automatic mutual recognition by ensuring practitioners have insurance required under the Victorian building laws and by making the registration details of practitioners working under the AMR available to the public. The AMR program allows individuals who hold registration or licences in an Australian state or territory to perform those same permitted activities in another part of Australia subject to the same exceptions. This is known as automatic deemed registration. Building and plumbing practitioners who wish to operate in Victoria under the ADR must complete the required automatic deemed notification form and supply it to the Victorian Building Authority (VBA) prior to commencing any work in Victoria, so you can see that a drivers licence approach is going to be more efficient.

This bill also addresses restricted plumbing licences. The VBA issues restricted plumbing licences that limit the holder to undertaking work on the plumber’s own home or that of a family member for no monetary fee or other consideration. This allows registered plumbers or those who are otherwise eligible for registration to undertake work that requires a compliance certificate on the family home without needing to be a full licensed plumber. This practice has been going on for at least 20 years. The bill clarifies the VBA’s ability to issue restricted plumbing licences, providing greater certainty for plumbers.

The bill will improve the operation of the building and planning systems including strengthening protections for consumers as we implement automatic mutual recognition and enshrining protections for Melbourne’s cherished green wedge in legislation. It builds on the Andrews Labor government’s record in planning for Victoria: managing the growth of our state, while ensuring that Victoria’s best features are protected and enhanced. In metropolitan Melbourne we are guided by our planning blueprint Plan Melbourne 2017–2050. We are supporting jobs, housing and transport and building on Melbourne’s legacy of distinctiveness, livability and sustainability. Our nine regional partnerships are ensuring that local communities are front and centre in planning for the future of our region. As a previous board member of the Great South Coast regional partnership, I can attest to that. The Great South Coast regional partnership links regional leaders together to identify and promote priorities for each region and elevates those priorities to a strategic approach to regional advocacy. Regional partnerships look to the future, providing planning and anticipating future needs, particularly in the areas of economic development, education, health and community needs.

We have protected and enhanced Victoria’s best features with stronger protections for heritage buildings and new protections against overdevelopment across Melbourne, including important landscapes on the Surf Coast, Bellarine, Bass Coast and the Macedon Ranges. We are also streamlining the planning process, cutting unnecessary red tape, increasing Victoria’s housing supply and creating thousands of jobs.

The economic value of such interventions is significant in the planning space alone. Planning made a significant contribution to the Victorian economy in 2022, with $3.6 billion worth of projects recommended through the development facilitation program, which streamlines the assessment and determination of projects that inject investment into the Victorian economy and keep people in jobs; approvals of over 1000 homes as part of the Big Housing Build program; $90 billion worth of Big Build project approvals; $5.6 billion in construction activity approvals; and the powering of nearly a million additional homes through our renewable energy permits.

Residential development has also been stimulated. Victoria leads the nation in the supply of new homes. The latest statistics published by the Australian Bureau of Statistics show that in 2022 about 62,000 new homes were approved for construction in Victoria. During the same period New South Wales saw only 53,000 approvals and Queensland 35,000 approvals.

In short, this legislation tidies up a range of areas that will provide streamlining and greater efficiency, strengthens the protection of Melbourne’s green wedges, streamlines the endorsement process for distinctive area landscapes, supports the implementation of automatic mutual recognition in Victoria and clarifies the power to issue restricted plumbing licences for plumbing work in Victoria.

Michael GALEA (South-Eastern Metropolitan) (11:04): I also rise to speak in favour of the Building and Planning Legislation Amendment Bill 2022. This bill implements a range of minor yet very important changes that will significantly improve the efficiency, the clarity as well as the operation of our building and planning systems. Passage of this bill is going to deliver various changes that were initially introduced in the now lapsed bill from the previous term, the Building, Planning and Heritage Legislation Amendment (Administration and Other Matters) Bill 2022. These changes will do a raft of things. They will firstly enable greater protection for our green wedge land. They will also streamline the process for endorsing a statement of planning policy for a distinctive area and landscape, further to which they will support the implementation of the national automatic mutual recognition scheme in Victoria, better known as the AMR scheme. This will provide a great deal of further certainty regarding the Victorian Building Authority’s continuing power to issue restricted plumbing licences for private plumbing work, which will improve the effectiveness and the efficiency in that sector.

Another change that this bill will effect is to streamline the process of endorsing a statement of planning policy for a distinctive area and landscape. This will actually make it easier for planners and architects to work together to create sustainable and attractive built environments that reflect the unique character of our state. The reforms of the bill will ensure much more effective management and protection of our green wedge spaces, which are important spaces that provide considerable benefit to all Victorians. The fact is that green wedges support local economies. They reduce the carbon footprint associated with needing to import food from further afield in other regions, other states or even overseas. They provide valuable ecosystem services and supports as well by protecting water quality and reducing the risk of flooding, and they also do this to preserve biodiversity.

In addition to these environmental benefits, of course, green wedges offer a tremendous amount of recreational and cultural opportunities for our communities. Providing space for outdoor activities such as hiking, cycling and even horseriding offers a peaceful escape from the hustle and bustle of city and – dare I say it as well – suburban life. Our green wedges are really vital, not only for the health of our environment but also for the mental and physical wellbeing of our community. If I may quote a literary staple, The Lorax, by Dr Seuss, who says:

… the days when the grass was still green

and the pond was still wet

and the clouds were still clean …

What an apt description of what our green wedges are to our city and to our state. Our green wedges are a thing to treasure.

This bill introduces a number of objectives for green wedge land and also includes a new requirement for councils and local authorities to implement and review their green wedge management plans. Now, I see him leaving the chamber, but yesterday my colleague Mr Limbrick told us how he was excited about tax policy. I can tell the house that I am very excited about the implementation of green wedge management plans. Let me explain why, because that probably does sound a little bit odd.

If I can give some context, the south-east of Melbourne takes in four green wedges, those being the Western Port green wedge, the south-east green wedge, the Yarra Valley and Yarra and Dandenong Ranges green wedge, and the southern ranges green wedge, the latter of which has a great deal of overlap with my electorate of the South-Eastern Metropolitan Region. Both the Yarra Valley and Yarra and Dandenong Ranges green wedge and the southern ranges green wedge, however, actually do not have a current green wedge management plan. It was never implemented, and I have had numerous conversations and discussions with community members and stakeholders in this region regarding the problems that the lack of a management plan poses, including the challenges, the uncertainty, the costs and other issues because of this. It affects local communities, businesses and the environment.

Like many in this chamber, prior to coming into this place I was involved in many different local community groups and organisations. One such organisation was a great local group that covers much of my region, that being the Eastern Dandenong Ranges Association for business and tourism, better known as EDRA. I had the pleasure of serving with them and supporting them on their campaigns and efforts to support small businesses, tourism and other providers in the outer suburban areas of Melbourne for the previous few years. Of all the issues that the group dealt with and came across, large and small, there was one underlying theme that kept coming up, and that was that there was no green wedge management plan for the southern ranges green wedge or indeed the Yarra Valley and Yarra and Dandenong Ranges green wedge either, which presented significant problems for the community. It presented issues around development and land use, particularly for those tourism regions such as the outer south-east, the Dandenong Ranges and the Mornington Peninsula, as my colleague Mr McIntosh referred to earlier. Not having a plan has a significant effect on actually being able to provide investment and on whether investors can provide their new tourism venue, their new business, their new microfarm – whatever it might be. Without a consistent approach in these green wedges, we have the risk of some ad hoc planning between different local government areas, which can ultimately potentially lead to worse outcomes for our communities.

It can also drive investment away from these areas, so I know how much of an issue the lack of green wedge management plans has been for these areas, as I said, including the southern ranges green wedge, which covers a large chunk of my South-Eastern Metropolitan Region. This legislation will address that. This will require all local authorities to implement their green wedge management plans, which is going to be the underlying basis for further sustainable appropriate development and growth in these regions, which will support our communities, increase their resilience and reduce the negative impacts of urban sprawl into these very special areas. This alone is something that gets me very excited about this legislation and I am very keen to see that in particular come through, because I can see the real-world differences this will make for communities such as Upper Beaconsfield in my electorate, such as Harkaway and such as Lysterfield. It will make a huge difference.

Evan Mulholland interjected.

Michael GALEA: Harkaway is a great place. Thank you. Yes, Mr Mulholland. I would like to acknowledge the potential as well that some stakeholders may criticise the government for progressing with minor amendments from the Building, Planning and Heritage Legislation Amendment (Administration and Other Matters) Bill from the previous term rather than wider building system reforms. But I would like to emphasise that these amendments are very important and necessary, and they represent progress towards achieving the government’s 2018 election commitment to strengthen the legislative protection of Melbourne’s green wedges.

There are of course other aspects of this bill which I would also like to talk about. This bill proposes several important amendments to a number of acts, including the Building Act 1993, the Architects Act 1991 and the Surveying Act 2004, to support the implementation of the national automatic mutual recognition scheme, AMR scheme, in Victoria. The AMR scheme was a game changer – in fact is a game changer – for tradespeople and professionals who work across state borders. It allows workers who are registered or licensed in one Australian state or territory to transfer their skills and work in another Australian state or territory whilst using their existing registration or licence. It basically means that they do not have to go through all the repetitive bureaucratic red tape in every single state and every single territory every time they wish to work outside of their home state. This bill will streamline mutual recognition processes and it will reduce the costs for interstate workers. The key features of the AMR scheme will include automatic deemed registration, or ADR, and public protection requirements, as well as providing compliance with local laws in each jurisdiction.

Victoria has introduced several changes to licensing and registration requirements for plumbers in particular. These changes aim to increase public safety by ensuring that all licensed plumbers meet the same exacting high standards. Once approved by other states and territories these changes will allow licensed plumbers from Victoria to benefit from the AMR scheme. The AMR scheme will basically mean that plumbers may work in other states and territories without needing to reapply each time for registration or licensing. It will save time, it will reduce costs and it will increase flexibility for licensed plumbers who want to work across borders – and obviously the immediate example of that would be those in some regional areas such as Wodonga or in my colleague Ms Ermacora’s region in the south-west as well. There are many border communities there where plumbers will benefit, or perhaps some enterprising tradies may wish to spend their winters in Port Douglas, and good luck to them if they can get work up there for those winters as well. The AMR scheme is an important step forward for tradespeople and professionals in Australia. This scheme will benefit workers, businesses and the public by streamlining that mutual recognition process, reducing costs and ensuring compliance with those local laws. Having Victorian plumbers participating in the AMR scheme is a win for the plumbing industry in Victoria and indeed for the wider Victorian and Australian economies.

This bill also makes minor amendments to the restricted licensing provisions in the Building Act which will allow the Victorian Building Authority to continue to issue these licences in multiple work classes, minimising the potential for unlawful plumbing work. The restricted plumbing licences issued by the VBA allow skilled and registered workers to undertake work that requires a compliance certificate without needing to be a fully licensed plumber, ensuring that the work is safe and up to standard. These commonsense changes will allow our building sector to function more effectively and efficiently well into the future. The VBA plays of course a crucial role in ensuring that the building industry operates fairly and transparently, protects consumers and upholds the highest standards of quality and safety. Any reforms that continue to improve the function and effectiveness of the VBA are a benefit to Victoria.

I spoke yesterday in another debate of the importance of our reforms for first home buyers, and in particular first home builders, and there are a number of schemes with which we are providing support to them including, as I referred to, the stamp duty concession on houses of up to $600,000 and reduced rates of concession on houses of up to $750,000. These reforms will continue to ensure that those first home buyers, who are taking that big step into their first home, will be supported and will not have as many risks to deal with.

In addition to that of course as well as the private sector there are a number of public builds going on at the moment, which makes the VBA even more important than ever. There are a number of projects of course, including the Big Build, that have already delivered benefits to Victoria and will continue to do so. They include delivering 100 new schools in the state, providing better education to students across Victoria, including the magnificent new Quarters Primary School in Cranbourne West, which opened just a few weeks ago; and the transformative Metro rail tunnel, delivering five new underground rail stations in the city by the year 2025. The Metro Tunnel will benefit my constituents in particular, as the Pakenham-Cranbourne line will be routed through it on the way out to Sunbury and the airport.

We are also removing 110 level crossings across the train network, a large number of them in the South-Eastern Metropolitan Region, saving lives and reducing congestion, and I have been really excited to engage with our local communities in Narre Warren and Beaconsfield in particular as we work to remove the Webb Street and Station Street level crossings in the coming year. We are also upgrading every regional passenger rail line in Victoria through the Regional Rail Revival program, and we are delivering record investment in health infrastructure. This investment means more hospitals, more beds and better health outcomes across our state, and I can think of no better example of this investment in our state’s healthcare system than the Victorian Heart Hospital. This state-of-the-art, specialist cardiac hospital is a first in our nation’s history. It is in the south-east suburbs of Melbourne, in Clayton on Blackburn Road. It is a fantastic facility, and I believe it is actually open to patients from today. So whether public or private, the Andrews Labor government is working hard to create a better Victoria. The VBA plays a critical role in making that happen. I commend the continued investment in infrastructure, health, sports, entertainment and other everyday services for all Victorians.

So to conclude, the Building and Planning Legislation Amendment Bill is an essential piece of legislation that will significantly improve the efficiency, clarity and operation of the building and planning systems in Victoria. The amendments proposed in the bill will provide greater protection for green wedge land – something, as I said, I am very excited about – streamline the process for endorsing a statement of planning policy for a distinctive area and landscape, support the implementation of the national automatic mutual recognition scheme in Victoria and provide certainty regarding the Victorian Building Authority’s continuing power to issue restricted licences for private plumbing work. These are very important and necessary changes. This bill will help to create a more efficient, transparent and effective building and planning system for our entire state that can adapt to the changing needs of our society. The commonsense reform in this bill provides considerable benefits to our communities, economy and environment. Other amendments will continue to streamline and improve our building and planning sector. For these reasons I commend the bill to the house.

Sheena WATT (Northern Metropolitan) (11:19): I rise to speak on the Building and Planning Legislation Amendment Bill 2022, which among other things will improve the operation of the building and planning systems in our state. In 2018 the Andrews Labor government committed to legislate protection of Melbourne green wedges, which are so important for biodiversity and natural environment. Melbourne’s 12 green wedges cover the areas just outside Melbourne’s urban growth boundary and provide an essential break between the intensive urban developments among the growth corridors. This land is critical to our economy and Melbourne’s food production, contributing around $5.79 billion in economic activity and supporting roughly 16,500 jobs. But it is also home to some of the world’s best wine destinations, parks and wetlands, and our green wedges ensure that the character and landscape of communities along the urban growth boundary are protected as Melbourne’s population grows.

Green wedges are so important to our growing city, providing a breath of fresh air amongst the hustle and bustle of suburban life. These lush spaces are the lungs of our city, and it is paramount that we legislate to protect them and preserve them. One of these green wedges is located right in my region of Melbourne’s northern suburbs. The Whittlesea green wedge is a thriving area supporting farming activities, scenic rural landscapes, parks – both national, state and local – heritage places, recreation and tourism activities, plant and animal habitats, rivers, creeks and water catchments, settlements and some rural living and much more. I am always so inspired and refreshed whenever I spend time in the beautiful surrounds of Whittlesea’s green wedge.

I want to touch on the work of the Darebin Creek Management Committee, who for over 20 years have been working tirelessly to preserve sustainability in local creek catchments and surrounding communities. Our biodiversity is priceless. The Darebin Creek Management Committee are champions for our precious Whittlesea green wedge. As the Parliamentary Secretary for Volunteers, it would be remiss of me to not give a shout-out to the Friends of Darebin Creek for all that they do. Volunteering is often a thankless task, but together you have been able to preserve, restore and manage the ecosystems associated with Darebin Creek and its tributaries around revegetation, rehabilitation, habitat creation and water health. Perhaps that is the thanks – the many years of future thriving life we will see around the Darebin Creek.

This bill strengthens protection of green wedge land by enshrining the government’s objectives for this land in legislation, delivering on a 2018 election commitment. I know how important green space is for our communities. That is why I was so excited when the Andrews Labor government announced the removal of eight level crossings in my community of Brunswick that we would have four entire MCGs worth of new open space. The Level Crossing Removal Project in Brunswick right near my electorate office will transform the community, reducing congestion and improving travel times whilst creating thousands of jobs. I only need to look north of Brunswick to Coburg to see how elevated rail can transform the use of space and open up opportunities for community use and better biodiversity. This bill introduces a legislative requirement for municipal councils to prepare and review green wedge management plans. The Minister for Planning will be able to issue directions in relation to the preparation and content of green wedge management plans, providing improved guidance to councils on their structure, form and content. This will better protect Melbourne’s green wedge against inappropriate development, an issue I know the communities of the Northern Metropolitan Region care very deeply about.

I am pleased to note the Whittlesea council already have a green wedge management plan, with 84 actions set out in the Whittlesea Green Wedge Management Plan 2011–2021, and every one of them has now commenced. Of these actions, 49 have been completed, five are still underway and 30 are ongoing changes to the way we work, including networking with the local Aboriginal community and rural communities, providing business support to help keep farmers on the land and partnering with community groups to better care for our waterways and environment. Here are just some of the initiatives already championed under the green wedge management plan: the Whittlesea community farm and food collective, a pilot program to demonstrate innovative sustainable farming practices, increase food security and provide an opportunity for residents to learn about local, sustainable food production; wayfinding and interpretive signage for all of the council’s 60 conservation reserves to promote the value and significance of ecosystems on council-owned land; and support for farming, including agribusiness and the right to farm, through a submission to the state government’s Planning for Melbourne’s Green Wedges and Agricultural Land review project.

Further, there is the South Morang Farmers and Makers Market held on the third Saturday of each month, which provides an opportunity for local producers to connect with the community and sell their produce locally. There is support for tourism in Whittlesea township through campaigns such as Dinner’s on Us, Shop Local, Choose Your Own Adventure, Christmas on Church and Winter Weekends as well as support for the Whittlesea agricultural show and Table of Plenty events. There is the strengthening of partnerships with traditional owners to contribute to a greater awareness, understanding and appreciation of the relationship between cultural heritage, traditional owner knowledge and Aboriginal community health and wellbeing. Advocacy is included for the proposed Melbourne food and wine innovation export hub, which will support the use of agricultural land in the municipality and provide a meaningful contribution to Victoria’s economic growth. There are partnerships with community groups on waterways, waterway health, Landcare and rural education to support our community’s own initiatives and new initiatives as a result of the green wedge management plan implementation.

I am pleased to note that this bill fulfils the Andrews Labor government’s commitment to protecting the outstanding environmental, cultural and economic significance of the Macedon Ranges, Bass Coast, Surf Coast and Bellarine Peninsula, and that is exactly what we are doing. These areas have been declared to be distinctive areas and landscapes, requiring the development of a statement of planning policy, a 50-year plan for protecting these unique features and providing certainty for housing, tourism and infrastructure investment. SPPs, as they are known, have already come into effect for the Macedon Ranges and Surf Coast, and Bellarine and Bass Coast are currently going through the process. An SPP requires the endorsement of public entities like water corporations, but at the moment there is not a set time frame in which they have to provide that endorsement. This experience has repeatedly shown that it is difficult to prepare, consult on and obtain the endorsement and approval of a statement of planning policy within the time frame specified in the Planning and Environment Act 1987. The bill streamlines the process for endorsement by responsible entities of a statement of planning policy for a distinctive area and landscape, requiring endorsement within 28 days. Streamlining the SPP endorsement process will remove barriers to finalising the SPP, ensuring we have clear plans in place that protect the features and landscapes of Victoria’s distinctive areas.

The bill makes changes to the Building Act 1993, Architects Act 1991 and Surveying Act 2004 to strengthen consumer protections under automatic mutual recognition by ensuring practitioners have insurance required under Victorian building laws and by making the registration details of practitioners working under AMR available to the public.

The Victorian Building Authority issues restricted plumbing licences that limit the holder to undertaking work on their own home or that of a family member for no monetary fee or other consideration. This allows registered plumbers or those who are otherwise eligible for registration to undertake work that requires a compliance certificate on the family home without needing to be a fully licensed plumber. Now, this practice will be known to many and has been spoken about by previous contributors to this bill, and it is worth noting that this practice has been going on for at least 20 years, but this bill clarifies the VBA’s ability to issue restricted plumbing licences, providing greater certainty for plumbers and the work that they do.

We have certainly heard criticism – I heard it earlier from those opposite on the government, on this bill – which I find a little amusing. I think we are all quite aware of the record of the opposition when it comes to planning, and I am very happy to provide a mild refresher for those opposite if they are interested or in fact for those of us that are here in the chamber. I cannot look past some of the skyscrapers in our city, and of course Fishermans Bend. I have probably got some words to say about Fishermans Bend, but I do know we have other members here from the Southern Metropolitan Region who probably too would have some very firm views on Fishermans Bend. Time and time again those opposite have put developers over local communities, and they have not learned their lesson. Only a few years ago they were promising to fast-track nearly 300,000 homes – I stumbled there because I could not believe the number – in the already under-pressure outer suburbs. Victorians just cannot trust the coalition when it comes to planning.

The Andrews Labor government has a planning record that we indeed can be proud of. We have been getting on with managing the growth of our state while ensuring that Victoria’s best features are protected and enhanced. The bill before us today will improve the operation of the building and planning systems, including strengthening protections for consumers as we implement automatic mutual recognition and enshrining protections for Melbourne’s cherished green wedges in legislation.

I have certainly touched on the record of those opposite, but I want to talk about metropolitan Melbourne. Metropolitan Melbourne is guided by our planning blueprint, Plan Melbourne 2017–2050, and in that we are supporting jobs, housing and transport and building on Melbourne’s legacy of distinctiveness, livability and sustainability. Our nine regional partnerships are ensuring that local communities are front and centre in planning for the future of their region. We have protected and enhanced Victoria’s best features with stronger protections for heritage buildings and new protections against overdevelopment across Melbourne, including in important landscape areas such as the Surf Coast, Bellarine, Bass Coast and Macedon Ranges. There is so much that good planning makes in terms of its contribution to our economy.

There are of course also 1000 homes that are being built as part of the Big Housing Build program. The Andrews Labor government’s Big Housing Build is the biggest investment in social and affordable housing by any state or territory. Thanks very much to the hard work of my former colleague in the other place Richard Wynne, the Big Housing Build became a reality. I am working really closely with the current minister Colin Brooks, who I know has a very deep and abiding passion for this and will see this work through. The $5.3 billion Big Housing Build is the largest investment in social and affordable housing this state has ever seen, creating an average of 10,000 new jobs a year over the first four years of the program, with 10 per cent of the work on major projects to be done by apprentices, cadets and trainees. The Big Housing Build commenced in 2021 and will be completed by financial year 2026–27, generating an estimated $6.7 billion in economic activity. There are tens of thousands of jobs associated with this, and our investment will deliver greater housing choices and affordability and ensure that more Victorians have the modern, secure and accessible homes that they need.

That is the end of my time. I have so much more that I would love to say, but I will leave my remarks there.

Ryan BATCHELOR (Southern Metropolitan) (11:34): I rise to join my colleagues in making a contribution on the Building and Planning Legislation Amendment Bill 2022. The purpose of the bill is to deliver several legislative changes first proposed during the last term of the Parliament, but unfortunately the Parliament did not get the opportunity to conclude its consideration of these matters prior to the election held in November last year. So I am grateful for the opportunity that the re-presentation of the bill to the Parliament post-election gives me to make a contribution on these matters, which are very important to a lot of Victorians, that I would not have been able to make had these things been dealt with then.

It is important also at the outset to acknowledge that this bill and the amendments contained therein do fulfil a commitment that the government took to the 2018 election, and they take significant steps to improve the clarity and operation of the building and planning systems. The bill will amend the Building Act 1993, the Architects Act 1991, the Surveying Act 2004 and the Planning and Environment Act 1987 to strengthen the legislative protection of Melbourne’s green wedges, to streamline the endorsement process for a distinctive area and landscape, to support the implementation of automatic mutual recognition here in Victoria and to make some important clarifications of the powers to issue restricted plumbing licences for private plumbing work in the state of Victoria.

The first matter that I want to delve into in a bit of detail in the discussion of the bill today is the amendments in that part of the bill which go to the protections that the government is introducing for what we know colloquially as green wedges. As I mentioned, there was a commitment that the government made during the 2018 election campaign to strengthen the legislative protection of Melbourne’s green wedges, and it is very good to see that that election commitment is being delivered by the government through this legislation here today. In that campaign the government committed to better protect Melbourne’s green wedges against overdevelopment and to put up those protections and make sure they were enshrined in legislation, because we know that legislative protections for these sorts of things are very important and we need to make sure that future decisions that are potentially made by planning ministers are being made subject to them.

The bill will introduce provisions in a number of ways. Firstly, there is an amendment to enshrine objectives for green wedge land in part 3AA of the Planning and Environment Act, and these objectives to be included relate to biodiversity, conservation, significant landscapes, traditional owner values and custodianship, open space, waterways, catchments, natural resources and agriculture. I think we can agree that they are all important objectives to be included in the Planning and Environment Act to make sure that those matters are considered, particularly in relation to our green wedge areas, for future decision-making. The amendment will also introduce a legislative requirement, very importantly, for local government authorities to prepare green wedge management plans. They will give the minister the authority to issue directions in relation to the content, preparation and review of green wedge management plans.

Surrounding metropolitan Melbourne there are 12 green wedge areas that are designated in order to protect, enhance and promote non-urban values and non-urban uses that support our city and the environment. I think the preservation, protection and support of these green wedge areas make a considerable contribution to the sustainability, the prosperity and the health and wellbeing of all Victorians. We know that right across Melbourne people travel to take advantage of the wonder that these green wedge areas provide. It is not just for the people who live next door, it is also for people who live right across town that travel to take advantage of the wonderful open green space, its biodiversity and its contribution to nature. These areas also support primary production. They contain areas of precious biodiversity, conservation and associated infrastructure, including a wealth of water resources. I know that is very dear to the heart of one of the ministers sitting here in the chamber.

Harriet Shing: Which one?

Ryan BATCHELOR: That would be you, Minister Shing.

Harriet Shing: Aren’t interjections unparliamentary?

Ryan BATCHELOR: Sorry, I will ignore them now. Green wedges will also contribute to important tasks, including energy generation, transmission and storage and are, I think, critical for tourism and recreation which are linked to natural environments.

We need these changes because these green wedges need our protection and support. It is why the government committed to providing this protection and enshrining it in legislation, because when it comes down to it we value the inclusion of this green space and these green wedges in wider metropolitan Melbourne. Part of what makes Melbourne so unique and such a wonderful place to live is that we have urban and non-urban environments that contain so much of our wonderful natural environment for us all to enjoy. Ensuring that that environment is protected for the enjoyment of everyone and not siphoned off for the few is a really important part of the kind of approach that this government clearly takes to these matters. It was also an important element of Melbourne’s metropolitan planning strategy, Plan Melbourne 2017–2050, and the accompanying five-year implementation plan, which included better protection of these green wedges and the inclusion of this legislative environment, the very thing that we are doing here today, as a priority action.

We know that as our population grows – it is great that more and more people want to call Melbourne and call Victoria home – it is critical as the stressors are placed on our urban fringe that we better protect these green wedges from overdevelopment and keep them as part of the range of infrastructure and support industries that enables our city to work, feed and function. So not only are these green wedge areas that we are protecting here today critical to our enjoyment of living and wellbeing, but they are a critical contributor to the Victorian economy, particularly through food production, and are contributing around $5.79 billion in economic activity and supporting roughly 16,500 jobs. What you will see from this government very much is the realisation that we can protect the environment, have great places for people to live and do so in a way that supports economic activity, supports economic diversity and supports jobs for all Victorians.

The other element of the legislation before us today is that it requires municipal councils and local government authorities, as the places close to the ground that are involved in planning and management of their spaces, to prepare and review green wedge management plans as a legislative requirement. It empowers the Minister for Planning to issue directions in relation to both the preparation of those plans and their content so that councils have clear guidance from the minister empowered by the Parliament on the structure, format and content of those plans, which we believe is a critical part of adding another layer of protection for Melbourne’s green wedges into our broader planning framework. What they will also do of course is help to streamline the process for the endorsement of planning policy for declared distinctive areas and landscapes – because we know in the past that this kind of management and protection of our green wedge areas has been sadly lacking because we have never had such a requirement in the planning law for these management plans to be put in place, let alone the level of detail, attention and care that the government and the minister will be putting into their preparation. It means that there is a lack of consistency across municipal boundaries, which so often occurs, and we have a situation where not all green wedge values are encompassed in each plan. And there is no existing requirement to update the management plans that may already exist at regular intervals. So the amendments introduced by this bill will help fix that arrangement by ensuring greater consistency and ensuring greater attention is paid to the updating and management of these plans to ensure that these areas are looked after.

We know that there is strong support from a range of sources for the actions the government is taking here today, and they have been the subject of extensive consultation as part of the preparation of this legislation. There was an extensive consultation paper released a couple of years ago and a series of early engagements, so we feel that there has been ample opportunity to talk with those affected by the proposals being put into legislation here today. That sort of consultation in the development of legislation is something the government takes very seriously.

The other things that we are trying to do in this legislation, which I touched upon briefly at the start, include some streamlining of the planning process to cut unnecessary red tape because we know that that can be a barrier to effective and efficient planning outcomes. One of the reasons we are seeking to do that is to increase housing supply here in Victoria. We had I think a very interesting and thoughtful debate in the chamber yesterday on the topic of housing and increasing the supply of affordable housing for Victorians. I know it is something that is close to the heart of many who have spoken in this debate and in prior debates. That is a critical element of what the legislation before us today is also trying to do.

The bill, in addition to the green wedge issues and the streamlining of planning and related amendment issues, supports the implementation of the automatic mutual recognition scheme here in Victoria by ensuring that building practitioners, licensed plumbers, land surveyors and architects working under the automatic mutual recognition arrangements are covered by the insurance that is required under Victorian laws and is about making registration details of practitioners working under the automatic mutual recognition arrangements available to the public. I think it is really important that Victorians know that when we have registered and licensed practitioners, plumbers, surveyors or the like who are operating here in Victoria under licences issued in other jurisdictions – and I think we do live in a nation that has managed to overcome the tyranny of federation eventually – we do have the consumer protections in place so that Victorians know who has been given registration under these regimes.

Lastly, I just want to touch on the bill also introducing some regulations in relation to plumbing and minimising the risk of plumbers undertaking unlawful work on their own family home or a family member’s home by providing certainty with relation to the Victorian Building Authority’s continuing ability to issue restricted plumbing licences for private plumbing work. I think what we have here today is an example of the government taking a very thorough, comprehensive, consultative approach to introducing important amendments to our planning and building framework. I think it is a sign that the government takes its job of doing this kind of work seriously. I am very happy to speak on the bill here today and look forward to future contributions.

Sonja TERPSTRA (North-Eastern Metropolitan) (11:49): I too rise to make a contribution on this bill, the Building and Planning Legislation Amendment Bill 2022. This is an important bill, and I note that many of my colleagues who have spoken on this bill today have focused their contributions on matters pertaining to the green wedge protections that this bill is going to undertake. But also there are a number of other aspects to this bill which I might focus on for the sake of completeness. I have a green wedge area in my own region, which I know that people in Warrandyte talk to me about frequently, but nevertheless there are other aspects of this bill that I think are worthy of mention.

There are a number of reforms that are being undertaken in this legislation, but for the purpose of my contribution I will talk about the restricted plumbing licences and the automatic mutual recognition (AMR) scheme that is being implemented. In regard to the restricted plumbing licences, the building industry has for the past 20 years recognised restricted plumbing licences as a path to authorising some practitioners to undertake lawful plumbing work on their homes and the homes of relatives. This bill will clarify amendments of the legislative framework to provide the industry and the Victorian Building Authority with more legal certainty and to ensure the VBA maintains the ability to continue issuing those licences.

As for scheme of automatic mutual recognition, Victoria has adopted this scheme. It enables individuals registered or licensed for an occupation in an Australian state or territory to work in another participating state or territory using their home state registration or licence. In effect it introduces a drivers licence mutual recognition model, which is incredibly helpful. So the bill makes changes to the Building Act 1993 and it makes changes to the Architects Act 1991 and also the Surveying Act 2004 to strengthen consumer protections under the automatic mutual recognition scheme by ensuring practitioners have insurance required under the Victorian building laws and by making the registration details of practitioners working under the scheme available to the public. Again, it is incredibly helpful in making sure that that automatic mutual recognition can operate. It is a helpful thing to do, because obviously you want to make sure if you are going to conduct plumbing works on a premises that you have got a licensed person doing it. But of course if it was your own premises it kind of had these complexities around it for you, so introducing this scheme will make it easy for people who want to do plumbing work on their own premises to in fact do this.

Effectively with the AMR scheme as legislated by the Commonwealth the key features and changes include that if you are an individual registered under the laws of your home state you will be authorised to carry out the same activities in other participating jurisdictions, which would in other words be known as second states, where registration is required to carry out that activity under an automatic deemed registration. The default position of the act is that individuals are able to do this automatically and are not required to pay any registration fees. Each jurisdiction has the discretion to determine that certain conditions are met prior to a person’s ADR having effect. Effectively a person is entitled to ADR only after they have submitted a notification form to the relevant second state’s local registration authority prior to commencing work for the first time. They also have to have met any relevant public protection requirements – for example, holding insurance; that is pretty important – and of course they then have to satisfy any relevant vulnerable person character test. For example, this requirement may also include undertaking a working with children check.

Workers using the ADR are expected to comply with the second state’s laws governing the manner of carrying out activities. However, there is no method to ensure practitioners are familiar with the second state’s local laws as the mutual recognition act does not impose an obligation to demonstrate local knowledge. Also, second-state jurisdictions cannot require a person using ADR to attain any further qualifications to those required by their home state registration and second-state jurisdictions cannot apply any conditions on the ADR. As of 1 July 2022 the scheme commenced in Victoria for building practitioners other than building surveyors, architects and land surveyors. All classes of building surveyor, licensed plumber and certain classes of registered plumber are excluded from the scheme until at least 1 July 2023.

So what is the difference between an AMR and an ADR? The AMR, the mutual recognition, refers to automatic mutual recognition systems as established under part 3 of the Mutual Recognition Act 1992 of the Commonwealth, and the automatic deemed registration is a type of registration a person is entitled to if they intend to work under the mutual recognition scheme. A person is only entitled to the automatic deemed registration if their occupation is not excluded from the operation of the ADR in the second state and only after they have satisfied any applicable second state requirements. As I said earlier, for example, the notification requirements or insurance are also required.

In mid-2022 the Victorian government did decide to exempt from the operation of the ADR the following classes of building practitioner and plumber, and the Minister for Planning did so using an exemption power conferred on the minister by the Mutual Recognition Act of the Commonwealth. These occupations were building surveyor, all classes of licensed plumber and registered plumbers in the following classes: gasfitter, type A appliance conversion, type A appliance servicing, type B gasfitting, type B gasfitting advanced, fire protection, roofing which is related to stormwater and mechanical services. These exemptions are due to expire on 1 July 2023, and a decision on whether to continue them, vary them or end the exemptions will be made prior to 1 July 2023.

I know that sounds a bit technical and dry, but I think that people who want to work in these areas and do these sorts of renovations on their own homes will be really pleased that they can now do this under these new amendments. I know there will be lots of people ready to get going on their little DIY or renovation projects, as we all are, and hopefully they will be very successful and will not need someone else to come and fix that work, which often does happen when we try and do DIY projects on our own. But we are talking about plumbing and the like, and these things can be quite technical.

I know when we bought our house someone had added on a bathroom to our house. All of a sudden the tiles were looking a bit dodgy, and you do not know these things. I mean, I am not a plumber. But obviously you get a plumber out and you get experts to look at what is going on. In the end, we had to gut the whole thing. So you can just see the importance of really strong regulation around plumbing works – it is very important. In our situation, because there was not proper waterproofing done, there was rot in the wood floor underneath the tiles. And if you let those sorts of things go, one day you walk in the bathroom and you put your foot through the floor, and it can be a nasty accident. These are the things that can happen. Obviously we were not covered by any insurance or builders insurance and the like, which was fine, because that had all expired, but nevertheless it was something that we had to do. And it was good because there is no way I could attempt anything like that, nor would I want to. But of course it was good to see that when I did get a plumber in I had absolute confidence in the work that they did. They did a great job, and we have now got a fully functioning bathroom, which is wonderful.

Matthew Bach: It’s very important.

Sonja TERPSTRA: It is very important to have a fully functioning bathroom. But when something does go wrong, it is very expensive, and you often cannot see what is going on. The floor starts to move, and you think, ‘Maybe something’s not right there.’ Or there is mould that starts to grow on walls. And you think, ‘Oh, my goodness, what’s going on?’ Then by the time you get someone in and you get a full appraisal of what it is like, it can be a –

Matthew Bach: It’d cost you an arm and a leg.

Sonja TERPSTRA: Well, it did in that case. It absolutely cost an arm and leg. But again, like I was saying, I think we have a high standard of quality assurance. That is why plumbers, gasfitters and those types of trades are regulated and registered – for a very good reason – safety is incredibly important.

Business interrupted pursuant to standing orders.