Wednesday, 19 February 2025

 Bev McARTHUR (Western Victoria) (18:36): (1435) My question is for the Minister for Planning and reflects a concern I have heard from numerous constituents in recent years. It relates to the meaning of the term ‘proposed’ in reference to developments, particularly renewables developments. There seems to be considerable confusion and inconsistency in how this term is understood, and it would be helpful to have a clear statement on the matter from the minister. Across Western Victoria, various projects have been proposed by proponents, and information about their intentions has been made public by the companies involved. Yet as far as the communities are aware, these projects have not gone through any stage of the planning process. They have not gained permits to commence work, nor have larger projects begun the EES, the environment effects statement, process. Local residents, however, are denied permission to build on their own land on the basis of proposed developments, which would create a setback distance encroaching upon these residents’ private property. In one case in the Buloke shire a resident who had already been granted permission to build on his land now sees his permit contested by the proponent at VCAT.

The action I seek from the minister is the production of a brief and authoritative statement which would provide clarity for residents, councils and project proponents, including answers to these questions. How can residents confirm if a proponent has a permit to build or has applied for a permit? At what point does a project become proposed? Do project proponents have the right to stop residents from erecting dwellings or making improvements on their own land if the proponents do not yet have a permit to build? Why are 1-kilometre buffer zones enforced on neighbouring land where owners have not signed up to host or be involved in a development and who gain no benefit at all in exchange for these substantial restrictions on their private property? Is the financial impact on a neighbouring property, in the form of increased insurance premiums due to increased fire risk or any other factor insurers may identify, a relevant factor in judgement of a planning application in the same way that other impacts on neighbouring properties – for example, visual amenity – are considered? These are the questions I ask the minister to answer.