Thursday, 8 February 2024

Land (Revocation of Reservations) Bill 2023

Second reading

Debate resumed on motion of Harriet Shing:

That the bill be now read a second time.

Evan MULHOLLAND (Northern Metropolitan) (16:34): I rise to speak today on the Land (Revocation of Reservations) Bill 2023. This bill aims to revoke permanent reservations at 13 locations across metropolitan Melbourne and regional Victoria, with distinct purposes for each revocation. The primary purpose of the bill is to revoke permanent reservations at specified locations, with the intent of either selling land or aligning the legal status with its actual use. Ten of the revocations are driven by potential intention to sell the land, while three aim to bring the legal status of the land in line with its long-term use. The Crown Land (Reserves) Act 1978 prohibits the sale of reserved Crown land, making this a necessary preliminary step for any sale proposal. The sale of Crown land in Victoria is subject to such legislative and policy requirements, ensuring adherence to strategic assessments and consideration of traditional owner rights.

In specific cases such as Haunted Stream, Alexandra Park and the Melbourne City Baths, the revocations are proposed to align the land’s existing legal status with its actual use. I will go on and highlight a few sites that will be impacted by this in a moment, because the government seems obviously to be intent on making quite a few changes to land status in places like Shepparton, Toolangi, Seaspray, the port of Geelong, Clunes, Walhalla and obviously Melbourne as well, in my electorate, but it seems to be very slow on other matters regarding the status of land and when it comes to changing the zoning of land. They are very good at talking about doing things but not very good at following up.

I want to go on to just briefly speak about a housing project which the government announced back in 2017 – the inclusionary housing pilot project. It was announced in 2017 with great fanfare by Daniel Andrews at the time, and this predated the government’s sudden interest in housing through the housing statement. The idea was to deliver social and affordable housing. Six owned sites were announced as part of it to be sold to developers at a discount, provided they provided 100 social houses, many of them in my electorate of Northern Metropolitan Region.

In Reservoir a site was set aside for development, but it was actually land designated to be a highway. The government have had since 2017 to rezone that land so they could build social and affordable housing, which of course we would support. It seemed like a good announcement. But the Minister for Planning has not even bothered to rezone land so it could be used for housing, even though they announced it back in 2017. So we have been waiting, what, seven or eight years? Is it going to be 10 years before the government gets off its backside and actually rezones the land? I know constituents in my electorate have been asking about that as well. But we are apparently expected to believe that they can go ahead and build 80,000 homes a year – 220 homes a day every day, including weekends and public holidays – when they are not even doing the work required to change the status of land, which would be quite simple, to rezone it for housing.

There is another one as well in my electorate. In Broadmeadows 65 houses were proposed for the site on Nicholas Street, but my friends at Hume City Council have stated that they know little about it, what is being planned or how many social and affordable homes will be built. Again, this was announced in 2017 for development with both public and private dwellings. It was said at the time that construction would commence in 2018 – quite a while ago. Nothing has happened so far. We did not see anything in any preceding years at that site. I am not sure what the government was doing. They had every intention of following through with that promise. They are very good at media releases, but my constituents in the Northern Metropolitan Region, particularly in Broadmeadows, are wondering what is happening with that. I know Hume councillor Sam Misho has been vocal about it and has said there needs to be transparency in regard to a construction time frame. The government seemed like it was being quite transparent when it said construction would begin in 2018, and it is still a vacant block. So it is very difficult to see how the government can really live up to their housing promises when things that are on the minister’s desk, like the rezoning of land, do not even get done. They are probably still sitting there.

Residents in Reservoir would quite like there to be more social and affordable housing, I would think. As a former resident of Reservoir, as a former Reservoir local, I have a long family history in that suburb, and I am sure they would love more social and affordable housing. But a promise that was made in 2017 – surely they could follow through on this. Surely you put out a media release and then maybe get some advice from the department, get a briefing and sign off on it. I would maybe give the government three months to make a change such as that – I would even give them six months. But it just does not happen. It has been 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023, 2024: eight years – seriously. And yet we expect the planning minister and this government to be able to fulfil their housing promises. It just shows a shocking contempt for the Victorian people that they would make announcements like this and promises like this and fail to deliver them. It is a failure.

There are a few revocations I want to run through. Victoria Park Lake in Shepparton is very ably represented by Kim O’Keeffe as well as Wendy Lovell in this place. The revocation aims to enable the purchase and refurbishment of a caravan park to boost tourism in the Shepparton area. We have also got a former potato research station in Toolangi, a revocation prompted by the closure of the research station in 2008, exploring future uses and potential sale of land. We have got Merriman Creek in Seaspray, a revocation to rectify a survey error and potentially sell land to the adjoining landowner with consultation required by traditional owners. And then we have the port of Geelong, a revocation prompted by changes in the Corio Bay foreshore position with the intention to sell part of the port of Geelong while maintaining the rest as a government road.

We always hear from those opposite particularly on privatisation; my new colleague Mr Welch will soon hear the lectures on privatisation from this Labor government. But as I have often stated before, no-one loves privatisation more than Labor. Joan Kirner actually began the sale of Loy Yang B back in the day. They privatised a whole bunch of things. They talk about the SEC and privatisation – they are the ones that actually began it. Of course they also sold the Port of Melbourne. They sold the last remaining parts of the State Bank as the Commonwealth Bank to the Commonwealth. They sold part of VicRoads and, would you believe it, they even sold Federation Square. One would think that privatisation is actually in the DNA of those opposite. They just love privatisation. They really, really do. It is in their blood. They can talk all they want in contributions read from their speaking notes, but they really, really love privatisation. We know that to be true, and this bill does foreshadow a bit of that going on. We know it is in the Labor Party’s heart of hearts. It is in their DNA. Of course it was Ms Gillard, a former Labor Prime Minister, who sold the last remaining shares in Telstra as well. They absolutely love privatisation. So do not ever listen to those opposite lecture about privatisation, because you just know they love it. It is in their DNA.

We have also got the revocation of Borough Chambers Reserve in Clunes to allow the sale of land to the tenant Wesley College Melbourne subject to agreement with traditional owners. The Dja Dja Wurrung Clans Aboriginal Corporation must consent to any proposal to sell the land within the agreement area.

We have got Stringers Creek in Walhalla – and can I say that part of the world is very well represented by the Liberal member for Narracan Wayne Farnham. He is a very, very good local member and I know he gets around, including to Walhalla, quite often. This revocation at Stringers Creek addresses unsatisfactory arrangements for the current occupants, allowing the sale of occupied land after a due diligence process.

We have Alexandra Park in Melbourne, in my electorate. The revocation aims to align the legal status of a small section of the park with its current use following upgrades to the Swan Street bridge. Following the completion of upgrades to the Swan Street bridge a small section of permanent reservation forming Alexandra Park was incorporated into the bridge’s structure. The revocation aims to align the legal status of the land with its current use. A small area of Alexandra Park on the banks of the Yarra River remains reserved for public recreation purposes. It is set for revocation.

The Melbourne City Baths are a great part of our city. This revocation aligns the legal status of a small area of the Melbourne City Baths reserve with its historical and current use as a government road. A small area of the Melbourne City Baths reserve permanently reserved for public baths and washhouses is set for revocation. The land’s long-term use as a government road prompts the revocation, aligning the legal status with its historical and current use.

We have also got the revocation of five redundant permanent reservations for mechanics institutes, with the intent to sell the land following a due diligence process. They are Darlimurla in Gippsland South, Haunted Stream, Mirboo, Narracan and Wombelano. They are ably represented by my colleague the Deputy Leader of the Nationals Emma Kealy. That amendment revokes five redundant permanent reservations for mechanics institutes at various locations. The mechanics institutes have not functioned for many years and the land is now used for various purposes, including a pine plantation and grazing. Other than the site at Narracan, all the trustees for the reserves are deceased. One of three trustees for the Narracan mechanics institute and free library is alive and has provided written confirmation that he has no objection to the land no longer being held by a trust. Following revocation of permit reservations and restricted Crown grants and the due diligence process associated with the sale of Crown land, the sites at Narracan South, Darlimurla, Mirboo and Wombelano are proposed to be sold, probably to adjoining landowners. Consultation with the adjoining landowners would occur following the passage of the bill.

As I was saying, there is a bit of a fire sale going on on the other side of the chamber. For all the lectures on privatisation and selling off things that this side of the house gets, they are having a bit of a fire sale over there because they have racked up the debt. Spending is out of control. We are due for a horror budget – another horror budget – according to the Treasurer, so the outgoing Treasurer is doing everything he can to try to make the books look a little better. As I said, that side of the house absolutely loves privatisation, and what we see here is a bit of a fire sale going on. They love privatisation. It started with Joan Kirner and Loy Yang B and continued on amongst Labor governments with things like the Port of Melbourne, part of VicRoads – and even Federation Square, this government sold off. They love selling things off. I know those opposite really love selling things off, so this bill goes a long way toward doing this. I suppose they have got the budget in mind, Victoria’s debt position in mind. They have ratings agencies knocking at the door.

They have the North East Link. I remember a time when the North East Link was going to cost about $6 billion or $7 billion. Then it cost $10 billion – and I note it is a very important project in Mr Welch’s electorate – and now it is going to cost $26.1 billion for the North East Link. If this was a private company, if the government was a private company, the person in charge of that project would be sacked. Yet Jacinta Allan, who was in charge of that project, was actually promoted for that. And there is the Suburban Rail Loop, of course, a $9 billion blowout before the project has even begun – before it has even begun – so they have obviously got to find the money from somewhere.

There is lots of intent to sell certain properties in this bill, so the outgoing Treasurer is doing his very best to make this supposed horror budget, as he has flagged it will be, a little bit better. He might have to just keep growth area contributions locked away for a third year in a row, as he has been doing the past two years, to make his budget seem a little bit better as well. I know in my electorate, and in Mrs Broad’s electorate as well, my communities are owed millions of dollars in growth area contributions. The City of Hume is owed about $80 million; Mitchell Shire Council is owed about $7 million by the government, but Tim Pallas is keeping it in a locked box. Those in growth areas are crying out for infrastructure. The bus networks are hopeless, and yet our growth areas – you have got towns like Wallan growing quite fast; one of the fastest-growing regions in fact, where you have got tens of thousands of people living – are still on V/Line trains. Most people have to drive down to Craigieburn to get a semireliable service. I note government media releases actually state that V/Line is the fastest-growing regional rail service. I wonder why that is. It is because of this government’s failure to provide Metro services to metropolitan suburbs.

And of course they cancelled the Western Rail Plan, which would have electrified the Wyndham Vale and Melton train lines. I would state that the only reason it is the fastest growing regional rail service is because tens of thousands if not hundreds of thousands of homes are being built around V/Line trains, around V/Line train stations. The government has some chutzpah talking about the fastest growing regional rail service. Counting in population growth in regional towns, there are not any more regional people using the train than usual. I would say it is the tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of people that are stuck on a V/Line service in metropolitan suburbs.

As I stated, we are seeing the government on a bit of a fire sale. For all the lectures on privatisation, I will bring them back to this point – they love privatisation. The Labor Party loves it. They cannot get enough of it. Certainly Treasurer Tim Pallas – sorry, outgoing Treasurer Tim Pallas – is a big fan of privatisation.

There are some areas of concern in this bill. We note that there have been no sale negotiations over any sites since the bill has not been passed. A number of sites are contingent on negotiations with Indigenous landowners. Regarding the revocations, there appears to be no concern as on the fact of it a tenant or neighbour has expressed interest in the land purchase. Regarding the alignments, there also appear to be no issues with this proposal. So we do not oppose this bill. It appears to be non-controversial and seeks to address the specific needs of various sites across Victoria, ensuring that land use aligns with legal status and facilitating potential sales.

David LIMBRICK (South-Eastern Metropolitan) (16:57): I also rise to speak on the Land (Revocation of Reservations) Bill 2023. I would like to take up a couple of points that my colleague Mr Mulholland was talking about with regard to privatisation. He stated that it is in the Labor Party’s DNA; I would have a very negative view of Mr Mulholland if he was actually promoting the Labor Party and trying to get me to vote Labor. But I am sure Mr Mulholland does not need reminding that the dictionary definition of socialism is ‘state ownership of the means of production’, and privatisation is the exact opposite of that.

Understanding the government’s financial position, which I have had many, many complaints about since I have been in this place – many complaints about them spending way too much money – I do not disagree with Mr Mulholland about any of that. They have been spending far too much money and getting into far too much debt. I also share the concern about ratings agencies knocking on our door, because if we get a ratings downgrade, that will be disastrous for issuing new bonds and all that sort of thing. It will directly affect how much it costs to borrow money. As people would know, the state government cannot print money, they can only borrow it, unlike the federal government, so they are dependent on financial markets.

What the government are doing here I believe is actually a sensible thing: they are looking at excess land reserves and are preparing them for sale. I think that it is in the interests of Victorians to take a hard financial decision and sell off some of these assets in order to put us in a better financial position. So I commend the government on going through with this, even though it is probably unpopular; they are probably going to have to make a few unpopular decisions quite soon due to facing financial reality. Nevertheless it is good to be in a position where the government is doing things that I approve of, unlike in the last term of Parliament, when I approved of very little. With that in mind, the Libertarian Party wholeheartedly supports this bill, and we urge the government to make more decisions – some of those are going to be hard – to ensure that this state is in a financially sustainable position so that we do get out of debt and that we do not do it by raising taxes on this state to the point where we are unattractive, uncompetitive and unproductive. We want to be leaders of this nation, leaders of this federation, and that is not going to happen if we are taxing everyone to hell and we are in a weak financial position. So I urge the government to continue making financial decisions that will help fix our balance sheet.

Sheena WATT (Northern Metropolitan) (17:01): Acting President, thank you so much for the call this afternoon to join with those before me in making a contribution on the Land (Revocation of Reservations) Bill 2023. The purpose of the bill before us is to remove permanent reservation as Crown land from 13 parcels of land across Victoria as well as six corresponding restricted Crown grants. Further, the bill will provide for new land management arrangements where the land may be reserved for a different purpose, be developed or offered for future sale – in line of course with regulations and obligations under the Native Title Act 1993 and any other relevant legislation.

I note with great interest that all of the sites affected by this legislation are under 6 hectares each, with the exception of the 105-hectare site in Toolangi. In the case of this land bill, we are obliged to consider property rights through the prism of the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006. I say that as a member of the Scrutiny of Acts and Regulations Committee of course, and in doing so I note the Minister for Skills and TAFE has noted that the bill is compatible with the rights to property protected under section 20 of the charter.

Before I turn to consideration of each of the sites, I believe it is important to acknowledge the importance of land reservations under the Crown Land (Reserves) Act 1978. There are over 8000 Crown land reserves in Victoria, occupying around 550,000 hectares. This land is used for many public purposes, such as public education, public hospitals, mechanics institutes, municipal buildings and lands, cemeteries, racecourses, recreation and a range of community services. In short, it is all good stuff. It is all important infrastructure for the benefit and enjoyment of all.

Of course though, responsible and strategic land use planning demands that from time to time governments should streamline and rationalise reservations on certain lands, ensuring that land resources are utilised efficiently and in the best interests of all Victorians. That is just what this Land (Revocation of Reservations) Bill seeks to achieve in the case of 13 tracts of land. It will remove outdated, unnecessary land reservations, allowing for fresh reservations that more accurately describe the actual uses to which the land has been put, and in some cases open up fresh opportunities for innovation and adaptive land use planning.

I note that the Department of Energy, Environment and Climate Action, or DEECA as some call it, reports that 10 of the reservation revocations relate to the possible sale of Crown land following revocation of the reservation. Now, there is no requirement for land to be sold once a reservation has been revoked. The land may be assigned for another public purpose. Indeed in the case of three of the planned revocations, sale is not under consideration. Can I just reaffirm: that is absolutely not under consideration.

Overall this bill promotes economic development by encouraging the fresh use of land for projects that will generate jobs, stimulate local economies, attract investment and enhance quality of life for everybody. It is important to acknowledge that changes such as those to be brought about by the land bill before us take time. Governments have to hasten slowly, since the management of Crown land is often subject to regulation and legal frameworks. Navigating through these processes can be time consuming, especially when amendments or changes are required. You see, legal reviews, environmental assessments and public consultations are integral parts of the process, and they all take time and careful management by the limited departmental resources. Can I take a moment to give a shout-out to the folks who are involved in that vital work with our community.

Indeed I note that the member for Pascoe Vale Anthony Cianflone spoke during the second-reading debate on this bill in the Legislative Assembly – and what a marvellous hardworking member he is – about the role of Crown land reservations and subsequent revocations and land use changes taking place in the districts of Northern Metro. Over long periods of time from the time of Robert Hoddle stretching through to the present day, as quarries and clay pits changed over the course of many decades to become places of refuse and landfill and then beautiful lakes, parks and other facilities, land reserved once for, well, a prison, has become a fantastic housing estate, shopping centre, cinema complex and one of my very favourite cafes.

Two of the proposed changes in this bill occur in Northern Metropolitan Region. The first has been a long time coming, I have to say. It concerns a reservation first made in 1878, a little bit before my time, yet the land has never been used for the purpose it was reserved for. Since 1860 Melbourne City Baths has provided vital public bathing facilities for hygiene and recreation. It is a celebrated and much-loved landmark to this day and has served Melbourne well, adapting to changing needs. It remains an iconic institution, fostering health and wellbeing in Melbourne’s urban landscape. I see that a reservation in 1878 provided for those purposes; however, the City of Melbourne reports that a tiny 10.2 square metres of land on the corner of Swanston and Franklin streets has always been used as a public footpath and not for the public bathhouse purposes for which it was reserved. I am pleased that this 60th Parliament will be putting this to rights by changing the status of this 10.2 square metres of land to reflect its use as a footpath – or in technical parlance I think we call that a government road – there you go.

I am going to talk about a second tract of land now in my district concerning Alexandra Park in the City of Melbourne. You see, part of Alexandra Park, which as members would know is located on the western bank of the Yarra River, was incorporated into the structure of the Swan Street Bridge during the bridge expansion project of 2015 to 2018 – my goodness me. This was a result of Victoria’s Big Build, as the government recognised that the existing bridge needed to be widened to accommodate increased traffic travelling across the Yarra River into Melbourne’s world-class sporting precinct and to provide better access for pedestrians and cyclists. By 2018 the then Andrews government had added a new eastbound lane to Swan Street Bridge, built walking and cycling paths on either side of the bridge, built a new pedestrian crossing on the Alexandra Avenue side of the bridge and installed some feature lighting and painted the bridge. I have got to say that this bill will revoke the current reservation and Crown grant as far as they relate to the area that is now part of the expanded bridge footprint so that the status of the land reflects its use as one of Victoria’s Big Build roads.

Look, I was pleased to read in the second-reading speeches in the Assembly for this bill that the members whose electorates were affected by the reservation revocations of five former mechanics institutes had made some contributions, all of which have not functioned for many years. It is generally reported that they were satisfied that revocations were appropriate and variously expressed interest in the future opportunities unlocked by the changes presented in the bill before us. DEECA reports that there are no structures on the reserves and that the lands are now used for a range of purposes, including a pine plantation, grazing and as part of a surrounding state forest. Following revocation of the permanent reservations and restricted Crown grants and the necessary processes associated with the sale of Crown land being completed, there is some land in places like Narracan and Mirboo that will be likely be sold, potentially to adjoining landowners. In the case of the Haunted Stream site the bill will provide that the land is taken to be dedicated as reserve forest under section 42 of the Forests Act 1958 so that it can be incorporated into their surrounding reserved state forest.

In other parts of Victoria this bill promises to unlock opportunity for economic growth and greater public amenity. Let us take Shepparton, for example. The Greater Shepparton City Council has operated a caravan park on part of Victoria Park Lake, which has been permanently reserved as a public park for more than 60 years. Removing part of the permanent reservation for a public park will enable potential sale of the land to the Greater Shepparton City Council so that it can refurbish the caravan park to cater for the increased tourism to the Shepparton area. I count myself as one of those tourists, having visited only this last weekend. This is very much a win–win.

I need to talk now about the hamlet of Toolangi. The population there is 366 according to the 2021 census, and I have read – it is very timely that I say this – about the impact of the 2009 Black Saturday bushfires on Toolangi and the surrounding state forests. There were, sadly, two deaths and 18 homes burnt. I do acknowledge that it is 15 years this week. The Toolangi Potato Research Station was closed in 2008. As a result 44 hectares of the reserve were excised in 2012 and reserved as a state forest. The remaining 105 hectares of permanent reservation have been identified as potentially suitable for sale. This bill will revoke the remaining reservation, enabling the potential sale of the land and thereby creating local economic opportunity. I note that in addition to this the bill will keep the Victorian Strawberry Industry Certification Authority and the Victorian Seed Potato Authority in the locality until at least 2031 by preserving a 21-year lease granted back in 2010.

Now I will move to the port of Geelong. There were 5.3 hectares of land reserved for public purposes along the shores of Port Phillip Bay and Corio Bay in 1873 – this is one for the history books – and they now also hold the status of government road under the control of the City of Greater Geelong. As you can imagine, land reclamation has progressively affected the Corio Bay foreshore since the late 1800s, indeed so much so that sections of that 1873 reserve are now located hundreds of metres inland, cutting across freehold land owned by GeelongPort. In order to facilitate further development at this vital Victorian port, now home to the Spirit of Tasmania, GeelongPort is seeking to purchase 2.1 hectares of the land, dissecting its freehold further. The northern section of the land described in this bill comprises an area of 3.3 hectares and forms part of arterial roads servicing the port of Geelong and the Shell refinery, so revocation of the redundant reservation will enable a potential sale of Crown land dissecting GeelongPort’s freehold, at the same time aligning the legal status of the other section of land with its use as roads.

It should be noted that the Victorian government’s strategic Crown land assessment policy, the Victorian Government Land Transactions Policy and the Victorian Government Landholding Policy and Guidelines require that strategic Crown land assessments must be undertaken to confirm the land is indeed surplus and can be sold. DEECA has completed assessments for all the sites identified for potential sale in this bill before us, with positive outcomes except for this site at the port of Geelong. In this case any sale process will only proceed subject to that strategic Crown land assessment confirming that the land is indeed saleable and surplus. Two of the parcels of reserved Crown land for revocation by this bill are proposed to be prepared for potential sale to long-term tenants on the land – one for a school – and this chamber should note that the revocation and sale proposals do not include part of the permanent reserve occupied by Clunes town hall. These sales will enable long-term existing occupants to continue with economic development in those communities. It will sort out the legal status of some land parcels, with their long-term use as roads.

With the minute I have remaining I will finally go to Merriman Creek, Seaspray, where the owner of the adjoining freehold land parcel constructed part of their house on the reserve because of a private survey error. Revocation through this bill of the reservation will enable potential sale of the land to the adjoining landowner.

In my view the bill before us represents a balanced approach recognising the importance of economic growth and suitable land use realignment while safeguarding natural and beautiful resources for future generations of Victorians. I will take this moment to commend the bill before us to the chamber.

Motion agreed to.

Read second time.

Third reading

Lizzie BLANDTHORN (Western Metropolitan – Minister for Children, Minister for Disability) (17:16): I move, by leave:

That the bill be now read a third time.

Motion agreed to.

Read third time.

The ACTING PRESIDENT (John Berger): Pursuant to standing order 14.28, the bill will be returned to the Assembly with a message informing them that the Council have agreed to the bill without amendment.