WA Premier Roger Cook will be granted extra powers to change the rules on approvals for hand-picked “priority projects” after his flagship State Development Act passed the state’s parliament.

Critics line up as WA premier seeks to change the rules to avoid FOMO

The WA premier is seeking wide-reaching powers to change the rules on approvals for “big, shiny, job-creating projects” — but it has prompted concern from the opposition, environmentalists and even lawyers.

The legislation, which passed the upper house last Thursday with some amendments, returned to the lower house today to get the final sign-off in a special sitting.

The new laws give the state development minister (currently Mr Cook) and the coordinator general (a government-appointed bureaucrat) the power to approve anything considered to be of “strategic or economic significance”.

But, concerns about potential consequences of the wide-reaching powers — and how quickly the legislation was passed — remain. 

WA can’t be ‘laggard’: Premier

The bill was first floated by the premier during a business breakfast address in September, taking some economic and sustainability experts by surprise. 

“I can’t let WA be a laggard,” he said at the time.

“I won’t allow WA to be the policy equivalent of a long-abandoned Blockbuster video store in the suburbs.”

Mr Cook detailed his plans to overhaul the state’s development framework in a bid to cut red tape for priority projects, but some experts were concerned the reforms would leave too much power in the hands of too few.

Mr Cook will have more powers to fast-track approvals processes under the new laws. (ABC News: Courtney Withers)

It’s a concern that’s consistently been raised by the Greens and environmental groups since the bill was introduced — and after it failed to get enough support to be referred to a committee.

“We hear a lot of talk from Mr (Opposition Leader Basil) Zempilas about holding the government to account about transparency, but when it comes down to it they are just working on behalf of big business in that chamber uniting with the government,” Greens MLC Sophie McNeill said in December about the Liberals not supporting the referral.

Greens MP Sophie McNeill (without hat) attended a protest against the government’s state development bill.  (ABC News: Courtney Withers)

Several peak bodies and experts also raised concerns about the scope of the powers afforded under the legislation, including The Law Society of WA and former Environmental Protection Authority chair Tom Hatton.

At a protest last week, the Conservation Council of WA Executive Director Matt Roberts described the bill as an “unprecedented and unnecessary power grab” to “shove through projects”. 

However, it has been strongly backed by industry heavyweights. 

Matt Roberts is the executive director of the WA Conservation Council. (ABC News: Courtney Withers)

Kwinana Industries Council chief executive David Harrison is in favour of the laws.

“The State Development Bill will streamline approvals, improve coordination across government, and fast-track investment — exactly what industry needs to remain globally competitive,” he said last month.

Conflict of interest fears

Mr Cook has instilled an urgency in passing the legislation, and the recently passed surrogacy and IVF laws, describing them as “priorities” for the state. 

How facts may be sacrificed in the push for faster project approvals in WA

As WA’s state development laws make their way through parliament, critics are concerned about environmental approvals.

“They’re important pieces of legislation and I’d encourage all members of parliament to make sure that they scrutinise the bills, but take the opportunity also to have them passed by the end of the year.”

The government knocked back several amendments, including one from the Greens to add a conflict-of-interest clause that would have required the coordinator general to step back if they had a personal interest in any of the decision making in front of them. 

It would have also required them to step back if they had a “substantial work history” within the industry that would be affected by the decision. 

“This is a scandal waiting to happen, this position,” Greens MLC Tim Clifford said during the bill’s late night debate last week.

“The fact that we aren’t putting in any safeguards around this position is truly troubling and I can guarantee down the track something’s going to blow up on the premier of the day’s watch.”

The government, however, conceded to amendments that force it to publicly reveal when time frame notices, which adjust or create deadlines for decisions, are issued to get opposition support.

“The parliament will be notified and therefore the public will be notified,” Liberal MLC Steve Thomas said.

“We need a bit of accountability in that process.”

It will mean when a time frame is changed, and when a revised time frame is not met by an authority, the government will have to let people know.

‘Unholy alliance’

Despite indicating her party’s support, Nationals MLC Julie Freeman raised some regional environmental concerns about the bill, flagging potential impacts on property rights and local decision making.

Animal Justice MLC Amanda Dorn also raised concerns about the coordinator general’s power while calling out the opposition for not opposing the bill, despite some Liberal MPs criticising it.

There is opposition to the law from both sides of politics. (ABC News: Courtney Withers)

One Nation MLC Rod Caddies hit out at the opposition for claiming the Greens were in an “unholy alliance” with One Nation for both supporting the bill going to committee.

“A bit rich for a net zero advocate like Dr Steve Thomas MLC to accuse us of being in cahoots with the Greens,” Mr Caddies wrote on social media.

“But to be clear, the reason One Nation is opposing this bill is because we don’t want to give the premier more power to rubber-stamp projects in communities who don’t want them.”

Loading

Source