Tasmanian Times


Call to restrict right to appeal

Damien Brown Mercury

A LABOR MLC says the public’s right to appeal against development applications may have to be restricted in an effort to weed out troublemakers.
It comes as the first water pipeline from the Meander Dam is held up because of an appeal. Members of the Legislative Council yesterday debated as a matter of urgency a motion calling for immediate changes to planning schemes to ensure developments were not thwarted by irrelevant appeals. Independent MLC Greg Hall used the opportunity to attack Greens groups for blocking the pipeline and other water developments “just for the sake of it”. It is believed the Resource Management Planning Appeals Tribunal has received an appeal against the first of four planned Meander Dam to Quamby-Osmaston pipelines. … Independent MLC Jim Wilkinson and Labor MLC Doug Parkinson agreed appeal fees may be necessary.
Read more here

Author Credits: [show_post_categories parent="no" parentcategory="writers" show = "category" hyperlink="yes"]


  1. Miles Ellis

    August 30, 2008 at 8:45 pm

    The RMPAT act includes a provision that proponents who have vexatious and frivolous appeals lodged against their developments can apply for costs from the appelant. If even one sceric of the appeal has some planning merit (even if that appeal uses a scatter gun approach as is often the case), then it is very unlikley that the tribunal will award costs. – http://www.rmpat.tas.gov.au and search for recent decisions – costs.

  2. Mike Adams

    August 27, 2008 at 9:48 pm

    Anyone else feel the thin edge of the wedge?
    ‘Let’s abolish those interfering RP somethings and have everything devolve upon the people’s representatives.’
    More and more like the early days of Hitler’s Germany: chip away at democratic incumbrances until you’ve achieved what you want.

  3. phill Parsons

    August 27, 2008 at 11:32 am

    Here we have the classic in pontification from the same residents of Coward’s Castle who assisted in stealing our rights with the Piulpmill Assessment Act

    Do these Legislative Councilors understand the current Act?.

    An appellant who is frivilous [has no case], vexatious [just for annoyances sake] or prolax [wastes time] faces the award of costs against them, making an appeal by an individual or organization potentially very costly.

    A small fee to appeal to exclude the above will not have the desired result and a large one will remove the processes accessibility to any projects opponents.

    The process abandoned by Gunns would have been completed by now and their Tamar Valley pulpmill approved or not.

    Instead they are still trying to satisfy the Federal Governments requirements, their share trading suspeended and they are seeking more funds from shareholders, all the signs of going broke.

    Instead of prostituting themselves our elected representatives should ensure that process is open, accessible and fair of which our current planning process does with 2 parts and ensures it is as fair as your wealth allows.

You must be logged in to post a comment Login

Receive our newsletter

Copyright © Tasmanian Times. Site by Pixel Key

To Top