Mr DEAN ( Windermere ) - Mr President, I support the bill and will make a short contribution. The member for Rowallan has covered a number of areas that I was going to mention. It was interesting when the Launceston City Council and the George Town Council had a look at this, the Launceston City Council came back with two areas that they had some concern with. The George Town Council was quite happy with the situation as it presents itself in this bill. The two areas that were of some concern have been raised. One was with regard to discretionary permits and the three types of notification required. The Launceston City Council was saying that the discretion really should have been given to the councils as to what notification is necessary in the circumstances, because you stick the notices up on these properties, they blow all over the place, they do not stay there for too long and they create some concern. You then have to notify the neighbours and put an advertisement in the paper as well. So the Launceston City Council was saying that is really over the top and ought to be left to the councils to ensure that people are notified in the proper way. They think this is going one step too far, but will accept the bill as it is.

The other concern was in relation to the five-year review which, as they indicated, is not a strong enough reason for not supporting the bill as it is. But it should be known that such reviews will impose an extra burden on ratepayers when these reviews are done. I notice in the second reading speech it says that the review is not an absolute redo - in other words, go right through it - it is simply an audit of it. Perhaps that is what happened in relation to the Criminal Compensation Act; it was just an audit and not a real review.

I think it suffices to say, Mr President, that most local governments are currently looking at their planning schemes, with a lot of changes being made. I know that the Launceston City Council have embarked on a full review of their scheme and there will be significant changes in the near future in relation to it. A number of other councils are also going through that same process. I am not quite sure where the State review is at. I think it says here it will be about another three to four years before an absolute State review is completed. I guess it is a bit of a nonsense when you look at all the local government areas in this State. They all have their own planning schemes which are not consistent with one another. On one side of the street you can build a home of a certain style and standard and on the other side of the street you cannot, where there are common boundaries for these councils. That really is a bit of a nonsense.

There are lots of areas there that need fixing in a small State like Tasmania. Developers will often say it is a bit of a nonsense. If you want to develop in Launceston, you have to meet these requirements; if you want to develop in Hobart, you have to meet other requirements, and that happens right around the State. So I think there are lots of things that need to be done in the future, but the bill is accepted as it is identified.