MINUTES OF PROCEEDINGS
The 4451 meeting of the Brisbane City Council,
held at City Hall, Brisbane
on Tuesday 4 November 2014
at 2pm
Prepared by:
Council and Committee Liaison Office
Chief Executive’s Office
Office of the Lord Mayor and the Chief Executive Officer
MINUTES OF PROCEEDINGS
THE 4451 MEETING OF THE BRISBANE CITY COUNCIL,
HELD AT CITY HALL, BRISBANE,
ON TUESDAY 4 NOVEMBER 2014
Dedicated to a better Brisbane
AT 2PM
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS _____________________________________________________________ i
PRESENT: ______________________________________________________________________ 1
OPENING OF MEETING: __________________________________________________________ 1
APOLOGY: _____________________________________________________________________ 1
MINUTES: _____________________________________________________________________ 1
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION: __________________________________________________________ 1
QUESTION TIME: ________________________________________________________________ 7
CONSIDERATION OF COMMITTEE REPORTS: _________________________________________ 19
ESTABLISHMENT AND COORDINATION COMMITTEE _________________________________________ 19
A HEALTH, SAFETY AND AMENITY AMENDING LOCAL LAW 2014 ____________________________ 43
B PUBLIC LAND AND COUNCIL ASSETS LOCAL LAW 2014 ___________________________________ 45
INFRASTRUCTURE COMMITTEE ___________________________________________________________ 47
A COMMITTEE PRESENTATION – LEFT TURN ON RED______________________________________ 49
B PETITION – TRUCKS TRAVELLING ALONG KATE STREET, ELLEN STREET AND PRESTON ROAD,
CARINA ________________________________________________________________________ 50
C PETITIONS – TRAFFIC ISSUES ON WATSON ROAD AND MORTIMER ROAD, ACACIA RIDGE _______ 51
D PETITION – PARKING CHANGES IN MARMION PARADE, TARINGA __________________________ 54
PUBLIC AND ACTIVE TRANSPORT COMMITTEE ______________________________________________ 55
A COMMITTEE PRESENTATION – NORTH BRISBANE BIKEWAY _______________________________ 58
B PETITION – NEW ACTIVE TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE - BRIDGEMAN DOWNS ______________ 59
NEIGHBOURHOOD PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT COMMITTEE ___________________ 62
A COMMITTEE PRESENTATION – PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BILL _______________________ 69
ENVIRONMENT, PARKS AND SUSTAINABILITY COMMITTEE ____________________________________ 71
A COMMITTEE PRESENTATION – STORMWATER HARVESTING PROJECT WHITES HILL RESERVE ____ 73
B PETITION – REQUESTING THAT COUNCIL PROVIDE A SMALL DOG OFF-LEASH AREA AT CURLEW
PARK, SANDGATE ________________________________________________________________ 74
FIELD SERVICES COMMITTEE _____________________________________________________________ 75
A COMMITTEE PRESENTATION – MOSQUITO CONFERENCE REPORT _________________________ 76
BRISBANE LIFESTYLE COMMITTEE _________________________________________________________ 79
A COMMITTEE PRESENTATION – HOARDING AND SQUALOR REDUCTION INITIATIVE ____________ 81
FINANCE, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE ______________________ 83
A COMMITTEE PRESENTATION – EXERCISE TEMPEST ______________________________________ 89
B PETITION – REQUESTING THAT COUNCIL FACILITATE A COMMERCIAL CINEMA AT THE OLD
WYNNUM CENTRAL STATE SCHOOL SITE ______________________________________________ 91
C PETITION – REQUESTING THAT COUNCIL CREATE GREEN SPACE ON THE OLD WYNNUM CENTRAL
STATE SCHOOL SITE THAT IS 3,200 SQUARE METRES IN AREA WITH 40 METRE FRONTAGE TO BOTH
FLORENCE AND CHARLOTTE STREETS ________________________________________________ 92
D PETITION – REQUESTING RELEASE OF COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT PLANS FOR THE WYNNUM
CENTRAL STATE SCHOOL SITE _______________________________________________________ 93
E PETITION – REQUESTING PARKLAND AT THE PROPOSED WYNNUM CENTRAL STATE SCHOOL SITE 94
PRESENTATION OF PETITIONS:____________________________________________________ 95
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
MINUTES OF PROCEEDINGS
THE 4451 MEETING OF THE BRISBANE CITY COUNCIL,
HELD AT CITY HALL, BRISBANE,
ON TUESDAY 4 NOVEMBER 2014
Dedicated to a better Brisbane
AT 2PM
GENERAL BUSINESS: ____________________________________________________________ 96
QUESTIONS OF WHICH DUE NOTICE HAS BEEN GIVEN: _______________________________ 101
ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS OF WHICH DUE NOTICE HAS BEEN GIVEN: ____________________ 101
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
MINUTES OF PROCEEDINGS
THE 4451 MEETING OF THE BRISBANE CITY COUNCIL,
HELD AT CITY HALL, BRISBANE,
ON TUESDAY 4 NOVEMBER 2014
Dedicated to a better Brisbane
AT 2PM
PRESENT:
The Right Honourable the LORD MAYOR (Councillor Graham QUIRK) – LNP
The Chairman of Council, Councillor Margaret de WIT (Pullenvale Ward) – LNP
LNP Councillors (and Wards)
Krista ADAMS (Wishart)
Matthew BOURKE (Jamboree)
Amanda COOPER (Bracken Ridge)
Vicki HOWARD (Central)
Steven HUANG (Macgregor)
Fiona KING (Marchant)
Geraldine KNAPP (The Gap)
Kim MARX (Karawatha)
Peter MATIC (Toowong)
Ian McKENZIE (Holland Park)
David McLACHLAN (Hamilton)
Ryan MURPHY (Doboy)
Angela OWEN-TAYLOR (Parkinson) (Deputy
Chairman of Council)
Adrian SCHRINNER (Chandler) (Deputy Mayor)
Julian SIMMONDS (Walter Taylor)
Andrew WINES (Enoggera)
ALP Councillors (and Wards)
Milton DICK (Richlands) (The Leader of the
Opposition)
Helen ABRAHAMS (The Gabba) (Deputy Leader of
the Opposition)
Peter CUMMING (Wynnum Manly)
Kim FLESSER (Northgate)
Steve GRIFFITHS (Moorooka)
Victoria NEWTON (Deagon)
Shayne SUTTON (Morningside)
Independent Councillor (and Ward)
Nicole JOHNSTON (Tennyson)
OPENING OF MEETING:
The Chairman, Councillor Margaret de WIT, opened the meeting with prayer, and then proceeded with the
business set out in the Agenda.
APOLOGY:
220/2014-15
An apology was submitted on behalf of Councillor Norm WYNDHAM (McDowall) - LNP, and he was granted
leave of absence from the meeting on the motion of Councillor Ryan MURPHY, seconded by Councillor Kim
MARX.
MINUTES:
221/2014-15
The Minutes of the 4450 meeting of Council held on 28 October 2014, copies of which had been forwarded to
each councillor, were presented, taken as read and confirmed on the motion of Councillor Ryan MURPHY,
seconded by Councillor Kim MARX.
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION:
Mr Michael Kane – Coal dust emissions
File number: 137/220/701/199
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
-2-
Chairman:
I would like to call on Mr Michael Kane who will address the Chamber on coal
dust emissions. Orderly, please show Mr Kane in.
You have five minutes, Mr Kane; please proceed.
Mr Michael Kane:
Thank you, Madam Chairman, LORD MAYOR and councillors; I really
appreciate this opportunity to address you all on an issue that I think is quite
important, and thank you for the nerve-wracking experience that this is for me. I
have timed myself and I am just a little under five minutes, so I'm hoping that I
can stay under five minutes, so I'd better begin.
Good afternoon; my name is Michael Kane. I am a community organiser for
Clean Air Queensland. Clean Air Queensland is an umbrella group for
community groups and individuals who are concerned about coal dust and other
pollution that is presently occurring in residential and urban areas in South East
Queensland. Some of our member groups include: The Friends of the Earth,
Oakey Coal Action Alliance, Clean Air Wynnum, Clean Air Morningside, Clean
Air Corinda, Clean Air South Brisbane, Six Degrees, Parents against Coal Dust,
Stop Brisbane Coal Trains, Rosewood and District Protection Society, Clean Air
Toowoomba, and we have allied groups such as Doctors for the Environment
and Lock the Gate.
We have been campaigning in Brisbane for the last 12 months, and plan to run
effective electoral third-party campaigns in the upcoming elections of all levels
of government.
The issue: in Brisbane we currently have about nine million tonnes of uncovered
coal wagons passing through our neighbourhoods every year. This means up to
5,000 full and empty coal trains or around 200,000 wagon movements annually
passing through 21 suburbs of Brisbane—quite likely, one of your own suburbs
in your own electorates on the way to the massive coal stockpile at the Brisbane
Port. The wagons are uncovered and emitting significant amounts of PM10,
particular pollution and diesel, and this is happening 24 hours a day, seven days
a week.
Hundreds of thousands of Brisbane residents are potentially affected, as the coal
can travel up to 10 kilometres from pollution point sources. The figure of nine
million tonnes could soon double to more than 20 million tonnes per annum if
the industry plans to expand the Acland Coal Mine, the Jeebropilly Mine, which
is located a few kilometres from Ipswich, the Wilkie Creek Mine and, if the
massive planned expansion of the Ebenezer Mine near Ipswich is also realised.
Approval is now being sought for several other mines in South East Queensland,
and these are just the ones we know about, but in the Wivenhoe catchment, there
is coal mines planned for there. So if they go ahead, then that is a potential
pollution source for Brisbane's drinking water.
Why isn't the industry covering up the trains? I don't think there is a good
reason. They say it is not a problem. They just say it is just not a problem, and it
is too expensive. I disagree with both of those, but I can't really go into that at
length at the moment because of time.
Earlier this year the National Pollution Inventory was published. The inventory
is a voluntary account of pollution, and figures that are submitted by all sectors
of the economy including agriculture and industries like the mining industry.
The facts speak for themselves. The coal industry is a polluting industry, and 80
per cent of PM10 pollution in Queensland is emitted by coal mining and related
industries, including the mining process itself, and the stockpiling and the
transport of coal.
The further east coal travels through Brisbane suburbs, the worse the pollution
levels are getting. The Brisbane Port coal stockpile is a major source of PM10
pollution in Eastern Brisbane. It is also important to remember that coal dust can
travel up to 10 kilometres, as I previously stated.
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
-3Health issues: Particulate matter, like coal dust, is 10 micrometers or less in
diameter, so it is very small. It is like smoking a cigarette—the same kind of
pollution, and is absorbed by the lungs and enters into the blood stream and is
known to cause strokes, heart attack, diabetes, kidney disease, asthma and
cancer, and that is the Australian Medical Association that says that.
Heavy metals in the dust cause widespread problems, particularly in children,
and is known to cause brain damage and development problems. This is a class
one carcinogen rated by the World Health Authority which ranks the same as
tobacco smoke and asbestos. I think it is important to remember that 40,000
children in South East Queensland go to school within one kilometre of the coal
train line, and more than half of them live in Brisbane suburbs.
Clean water is also emerging as an issue for Brisbane residents. As I previously
said, coal mines are now planned for the Wivenhoe catchment, and according to
some politicians, very likely to go ahead.
What we want: we want basically to cover the coal trains. We are not asking too
much. Everybody else has to cover them; I don't know why the coal industry
doesn’t. We want best practice dust mitigation at stockpiles and mines. So,
they're just watering, possibly enclosure and other measures at the moment. I
believe we have one of the worst practice stockpiling dust mitigation measures
in the developed world. We want safe drinking water. So it is not too much to
ask. I think that is fairly reasonable, and I hope that I can get your support for
that.
Clean Air Queensland would like to work with the Brisbane City Council
towards a coal dust free Brisbane. We understand that Council's legal and
legislative powers cannot be easily used to make a difference on this issue, but
we also do not underestimate the Council's ability to show leadership on this
issue in Brisbane. I think if Council got behind this issue, I think we could make
real inroads, and I think we could achieve some pretty sensible changes for the
industry practice—
Chairman:
Mr Kane, thank you—
Mr Michael Kane:
—that would significantly improve this issue.
Chairman:
—your time has expired.
Mr Michael Kane:
So thank you very much for your time. Thank you.
Chairman:
Thank you. Just take a seat, thanks, Mr Kane. Councillor BOURKE, would you
care to respond?
Response by Councillor Matthew BOURKE, Chairman of the Environment, Parks and Sustainability
Committee
Councillor BOURKE:
Thanks very much, Madam Chairman. Look, Mr Kane, thank you very much for
coming in this afternoon, on Melbourne Cup Day, to speak to us about this
important issue to you. In my role as Chairman for Environment, Parks and
Sustainability, I obviously take care of all of Council's green initiatives, our
sustainability issues, but also our air-quality policy. Obviously it is a very
controversial issue that you have raised, and one that you have done a lot of
detailed work into as well as work with other groups. You have brought together
a number of groups to lobby the State Government and also the time you are
giving this afternoon to Council.
As you acknowledged in your own speech, there is only limited things that
Council can do to influence the outcome with regards to covering of coal trains.
It primarily is a State or a Federal issue, depending on the railway that they're
on. I know, no doubt, that you have already probably been in contact with the
Minister for Transport, Mr Scott Emerson, or alternatively, of course, with
Minister Springborg as the Minister for Health.
Obviously I would encourage you to continue pursuing those channels, because
the State Government is the level of government that can implement the
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
-4changes, I believe, that you are seeking. So once again, thank you very much,
Mr Kane, for your time this afternoon and for coming into Council.
Chairman:
Thank you, Mr Kane.
Mr Warwick Mortensen – Save Pullenvale Reserve community group’s concerns
File number: 137/220/701/197
Chairman:
I would now like to call on Mr Warwick Mortensen who will address the
Chamber on the Save Pullenvale Reserve community group's concerns. Orderly,
please show Mr Mortensen in.
Mr Mortensen, you have five minutes; please proceed.
Mr Warwick Mortensen:
My name is Warwick Mortensen. I am here representing residents from
Pullenvale in Brisbane's west. Pullenvale residents are in shock that Council and
the ward councillor are supporting a proposed development for a large car park
in a private exclusive club for the Brisbane Kenmore Bridge Club on a small
park and cemetery called Pullenvale Reserve.
This reserve is recognised by Council and State Government documents as, in
the 18th century, a cemetery. It homes at least 15 to 20 bodies. It is also known
by second and third generation locals as a resting place for some indigenous
souls. In fact, the local Turrbal people are watching this development
application unfold very closely, but it does not end here. It is going to be built
with our rates. According to members of the Bridge Club, Council has promised
them the land. Council has also promised them a grant from our rates to build
their private clubhouse.
Let me say now: this is not an attack on the Kenmore Bridge Club; this is an
objection to an inappropriate use of State-owned land of which Council is the
trustee. This is an objection to the question of the development application
process. This is an objection to, dare I say, its secret deals with the bridge club
to deliver them a long term awaited clubhouse.
Over the years, developers, community groups and even local residents have
wanted to build on this reserve. The answer from State Government and local
Council has always been a resounding no. So why now suddenly, after all these
years, does Council want to build a private clubhouse for their local playing
bridge allies. The DA (development application) was rushed through; it is
incomplete; it did not secure State Government consent.
The State Minister for Natural Resource and Mines, Andrew Cripps, and the
department are now involved. This department instructed Council to follow the
proper process that joint consent must be given to the DA submission, yet
Brisbane City Council continues to ignore these directives.
This means that the Kenmore Bridge Club's DA was submitted without the
State's consent, therefore not made properly. Nor does the DA meet the purpose
of the reserve, which is for recreation, not for private commercial enterprise.
Take a look at the DA. It was submitted as a club, not a community group. I
repeat: it was not registered as a community but a private club.
Environmental concerns: ecologists from Australian Koala Foundation have
found plenty of evidence of koalas using this site. This fits with the Federal
definition of habitat critical to this viable koala. Trees on this site: many of the
mature trees' holes for birds were over 100 years old and under VPO
(Vegetation Protection Order), yet proposed development can cut them down for
private car park. At what point will Council listen and adhere to the Government
legislation? There's more.
The Queensland Minister of Natural Resource and Mines gave locals a spread
sheet of 18 reserve locations and also the trusteeship under this Council for their
club. Even local State MP Dr Bruce Flegg said that there are other sites that
make more sense than this one. However, Dr Flegg has been silenced and his
sole contact was via Councillor de WIT, yet Councillor de WIT is refusing to
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
-5see us. Why are locals being silenced, and why aren't alternate locations being
investigated?
Back to the DA process: multiple inconsistencies have set alarm bells ringing.
Locals in Pullenvale Ward were told not to send objections to Council; then
were told we could; then the objections would be considered; then not. So, some
were uploaded to PD Online, others were not. All objections were removed from
PD Online and then uploaded again at different stages. Some correspondence is
still missing. It is political interference or a bureaucratic process. Locals want to
know why was the bridge club promised this land? Why would ratepayers pay
multimillion dollars for a development grant for private use?
What did the developer find out to submit their DA into Council immediately
prior to a zoning change from sports and recreation to open space? There is no
local infrastructure; there is no transport; there is no sewerage; there are no
footpaths, there's no lighting. In the current economic environment, why is
Council even considering developing the green field site?
What should we do now? Council should decline this DA. Appropriate consent
has not been received from the State. If resubmitted by Kenmore Bridge Club, it
should be assessed under the new zoning open space in the 2014 plan. The
reserve should remain its open space. From the research it looks as the earliest
colonial cemetery between Brisbane and Ipswich. Council should investigate
more suitable site locations with existing social infrastructures or 800 members.
I urge common sense to prevail. Thank you for giving time to the Pullenvale
residents.
Chairman:
Can you please take a seat, Mr Mortensen? Councillor ADAMS, would you care
to respond?
Response by Councillor Krista ADAMS, Chairman of the Brisbane Lifestyle Committee
Councillor ADAMS:
Thank you, Madam Chairman, and thank you, Mr Mortensen for your address to
Council today on the application on Pullenvale Recreation Reserve. I appreciate
your taking the time to come in today, a day when most people are focused on
something that is happening down south rather than what's happening in
Brisbane.
I recognise that, as a neighbour of the proposed bridge club facility that you
have put in a submission regarding this development approval with the
Development Assessment Team, and that will be considered in due course. But
it is important to note right now it is still in info request state, and that period
has been extended because of some of the investigations that still need to be
taken on this site.
It will be assessed by the DA Team. I am responding on it today on your behalf
as the Chairman of Brisbane Lifestyle, because I wanted to talk about the
wonderful opportunity this community dividend will actually give the
Pullenvale area on the Pullenvale Recreation Reserve. With regards to the
process of the development application, both the Kenmore Bridge Club and the
Meals on Wheels approached Council around August, October last year, and
they requested a site to develop their new community facility where they could
co-locate together.
We did a very extensive search around sites in the Pullenvale/Kenmore region
that may be suitable. There are no community facilities within the Pullenvale
region. We went through a search analysis which was undertaken and a report
completed in November of last year. There were actually 21 sites that we went
through in the local area. We narrowed them down to 12 possibilities. Again, we
sat down with the local groups and the local councillor, our Sport and
Recreation officers, and our Community Development officers, and came up
with the situation that 43 Pullenvale Road at Pullenvale was the most
appropriate site for the development of a new community facility in the local
area, as it was zoned sport and recreation. It is non-floodable; had a reasonably
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
-6cleared space at the front of the site for development which would have the least
disturbance on the significant trees as you mentioned in the area as well.
So, following this assessment, Council spoke to the local group and said that this
site was a possibility as a DA opportunity for the bridge club, and that
discussion we had with them in May 2014. So the Kenmore Bridge Club took
this opportunity to make a pre-lodgement with Council on 11 June, and then
they did lodge an impact-assessable DA over the site about a month later.
It did come to our attention then that the community had some concerns about
the DA, and the information request period was extended to 20 November,
which we are still in at the moment, to allow for the community issues to be
investigated. As you mentioned, this includes the possibility of unmarked graves
and Aboriginal cultural significance.
I am first to say that, yes, Council has helped the club through some of these
issues and investigations. We felt that it was important since we were the actual
people to suggest that this site would be appropriate for a DA for this
community facility, that it was our responsibility to support them through some
of this initial investigation stage that needed to be done on the site as well.
So Brisbane City Council officers did meet with the Turrbal Aboriginal people
at the Pullenvale Recreation Reserve in August. The Turrbal representatives
acknowledged the scar trees that were actually on the site; acknowledged their
cultural significance, but were more than satisfied that the footprint of the
building would not interfere with the trees and the positions of where they are.
Brisbane City Council also contracted UQ archaeology to undertake a burial
investigation using ground-penetrating radar technology. That started in late
September, and we got the report end of last week. The UQ investigated the area
that was covered by the building footprint that has been identified in the DA,
and the results indicated that there is no conclusive evidence of potential burials
in the area where the building footprint is to go.
So, Mr Mortensen, this raises the issue really about the building footprint. This
site is called the Pullenvale Recreation Reserve. It is 1.9 hectares in size. It is
19,000 square metres. The building footprint that we are talking about is just
over 500 square metres, so about 2.7 per cent of the actual site of the recreation
reserve. It is situated largely in the cleared area at the front of the site. The
building is 50 metres on one side from a boundary, 58 metres from the other
side of a property boundary, and then the residential buildings are set back from
those boundaries as well.
I think the most important thing, too, is that this is not a commercial site, and it
is not a function area. This is a community lease, and I can assure you that
venues that operate under community leases operate under appropriate times
within the community. So, just to make that very clear: no commercial activity
can occur on the Pullenvale Recreation Reserve as a part of a potential lease
with the Kenmore Bridge Club.
So a community lease is for a not-for-profit group with open membership,
absolutely not for private use or exclusive use. Most importantly, if this club
became unviable in the future, this building would come back to Brisbane City
Council as a community facility for use in the Pullenvale region for perpetuity.
At the moment they have no community facility in that region as well.
Councillor interjecting.
Chairman:
Councillor ABRAHAMS!
Councillor ADAMS:
So, Mr Mortensen, I hope I have made it clear why we proposed this site in the
first place for a community facility. But do note, however, that this full
assessment will need to be done by the Development Assessment Team in due
course, but thank you very much for coming in today.
Chairman:
Thank you.
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
-7-
QUESTION TIME:
Chairman:
Are there any questions of the LORD MAYOR or a Chairman of any of the
standing committees? Councillor MARX.
Question 1
Councillor MARX:
Thank you, Madam Chair; my question is to the LORD MAYOR. G20 is just
around the corner, and our city is definitely open for business, and for tourists
and for residents alike. I understand that you were out earlier today launching
Brisbane City Council's 20th CityCat to coincide with the start of the G20
Leaders’ Summit. Can you please update the Chamber on this launch, and
explain what it means for the residents?
LORD MAYOR:
Thanks very much, Madam Chairman.
Councillors interjecting.
Chairman:
Order!
LORD MAYOR:
I thank Councillor MARX for the question and note the negativity in relation to
this matter opposite. The CityCat today was Brisbane's 20 th CityCat, and it has
been delivered with a G20 livery. This I think is appropriate, given that the 19 th
CityCat also had a recognition, in that case about the Spirit of Brisbane, of
course, in light of the flood event and the mud army, and it was appropriate at
that time that that CityCat was recognised in that way.
The CityCat today is going to be called Nar-dha. It's a reflection of black ducks.
It is a terminology, a meaning of Nudgee, so an indigenous word for Nudgee.
The CityCat is a $3.3 million vessel. We had the great pleasure today to join
with Mrs Shirley Wright, who is the daughter-in-law of the company founder of
Norman R Wright and Sons, and it was appropriate, I think, that she launched
this CityCat, the 20th. Norman Wright and Sons have now produced 12 of this
city's 20 CityCat vessels, and again this vessel will go into operation
immediately.
It is not the last vessel, of course; we will have another CityCat which will be in
the water by the middle of next year. We indicated back in 2012 a commitment
for two new CityCats, and these are the two—today's delivery and another by
the middle of next year.
The CityCat fleet is obviously very, very important to the city of Brisbane. We
have now seen since 2004 some 12 CityCats launched, and another one to be
launched next year. The particular brand of CityCat, this particular one, as I said
has a G20 livery. That has been decided upon in consultation with the G20
taskforce. It does certainly stand out in the water. It has its own distinctive
colours, and it will be again a great addition to the CityCat fleet.
The G20, of course, is not far away, and as you have correctly point out,
Councillor MARX, we want this city to be open for business; we want people to
enjoy the CBD, enjoy all of the activities that are going to be occurring as part
of the G20 event. Is there security? Of course, there is. There needs to be, and
rightly so. But equally, we want people to engage in this city. We want people to
be involved, and that is why we have put on some live entertainment and other
things around that.
Some of the names of our CityCats at this time—the first CityCat of course put
on the water was called Kurilpa. Then in 2008, Meeandah was put out there;
Beenung-urrung was put out there in August 2004; Gootcha was put into the
water in July 2010, and many others. So we have a comprehensive fleet, and this
CityCat fleet continues to grow.
Again, up by 1998, we saw eight CityCats on the water. There were no more
then for the next six years—no more until August 2004. Since then, this fleet
has been continuing to grow, and as I say, has gone from eight in 2004 to now
being 20, and will be 21 by the middle of next year. So, Madam Chairman, a
welcome addition to the river vessels, and of course it will be out there as a
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
-8permanent reminder that the City of Brisbane was the host for the G20 summit
for 2014.
Chairman:
Further questions; Councillor DICK.
Question 2
Councillor DICK:
Thank you, Madam Chair; my question is to the LORD MAYOR. Before I
begin, I acknowledge Brisbane's indigenous leaders in the Public Gallery with
us this afternoon.
LORD MAYOR, G20 will bring the focus of the world on Brisbane and how
Australia treats our indigenous people. Will you take this opportunity today to
announce, as an act of reconciliation, to give a commitment to the Aboriginal
community, to provide them with a long-term lease of the Council-owned Jagera
Hall at South Brisbane?
Public Gallery interjection.
Chairman:
Order! Order! Order in the Public Gallery.
Public Gallery interjection.
Chairman:
If there is any further noise interruption from the Public Gallery, you can be
asked to leave. So, to remain in the Public Gallery, remain quiet. Thank you,
LORD MAYOR.
LORD MAYOR:
Madam Chairman, I thank Councillor DICK for the question. Councillor DICK,
many members of the indigenous community will know that I have been having
an engagement with them now for a considerable period of time around selfgovernance of Jagera Hall. I have very clearly given my commitment to the
indigenous people of this city that that is what I want.
But it has to be on a set of governance that is the indigenous people's rules and
governance. I am not going to make the governance rules for them. I've made
that very clear. I had a meeting last year here in City Hall. I invited the
indigenous community elders at that time and other representatives that were
present to come back to me with a date when we could meet, not in City Hall,
but out somewhere at a place of their choosing where I'd be happy to come to
have that meeting, to further advance the issues of self-governance for the
indigenous communities of Jagera Hall. Madam Chairman, I am still waiting. I
am still waiting. That is the fact.
Councillor interjecting.
Chairman:
Order!
LORD MAYOR:
I have had several meetings around this issue with the elders of the indigenous
community and other invited guests, some of whom perhaps are in the gallery. I
don't know who is in the Public Gallery. But that is a standing offer. It remains
my commitment today, as it always has been.
But I again say today: I am not going to make the rules in relation to the selfgovernance of Jagera Hall. That will not work. I am not going to impose my will
upon the indigenous people of this city. They need to come up with governance
arrangements that they agree with and present to me, and then we can make it
happen. It will not be a day too soon for me when that occurs. I think it is right, I
think it is proper, that the indigenous community of Brisbane are given the
opportunity to have the ownership and the self-governance of the Jagera Hall.
That has remained my position.
I make that fresh commitment today. But again, we had that meeting last year. I
have been waiting for an agreed time and place. Let me know, and I will be
there.
Chairman:
Further questions; Councillor OWEN-TAYLOR.
Councillor OWEN-TAYLOR: Thank you, Madam Chair—
Councillor DICK:
Point of order, Madam Chair.
Chairman:
Yes, Councillor DICK; point of order.
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
-9-
MOTION FOR SUSPENSION OF STANDING RULES:
222/2014-15
At that juncture, Councillor Milton DICK moved, seconded by Councillor Helen ABRAHAMS, that the
Standing Rules be suspended to allow the moving of the following motion
That the Lord Mayor urgently take this opportunity to announce, as an act of reconciliation, a commitment to
the Aboriginal community that Council will provide them with a long-term lease of the Council-owned Jaggara
(Jagera) Hall at South Brisbane.
Chairman:
Councillor DICK, you have three minutes to establish urgency.
Councillor DICK:
Thank you, Madam Chair. I move this urgency motion today because, on the
eve of G20, with world leaders about to arrive in this city, our Council must
send a very clear message to the indigenous community that we mean what we
say. We have heard weasel words from the LORD MAYOR today. It is time
that this Council sent a united message to those world leaders when we talk
about reconciliation, we do more than tokenistic gestures.
On the day the LORD MAYOR wants credit for naming a CityCat vessel, a
commendable idea, today is about sending an absolute clear commitment to the
indigenous community: we mean what we say. It is not good enough, LORD
MAYOR, to say we are waiting. You need to show leadership, and this Council
must act as one. It is urgent that, before the world leaders arrive, on the day
when we saw the hall locked and possessions removed without consultation,
without engagement with the cultural centre, that we actually show leadership as
one, as a united Council.
If the LORD MAYOR is true about what he is saying, he will support this
bipartisan motion today. He will send an absolute clear message to the
indigenous community, but the whole world, that Brisbane is open when it
comes to reconciliation. It is urgent, Madam Chair, because in a matter of days,
in a matter of days, the world's eyes will be on Brisbane. We will see world
leaders; we will see media right across the globe, coming to Brisbane, to look at
how we treat our indigenous citizens.
Well, LORD MAYOR, if you are true to your word today, you will support this
motion. You will back in; you will send that absolute clear message. I say: time
for action is today; you must support this motion.
Chairman:
I will put the motion for the suspension of Standing Rules to allow an urgency
motion to be moved.
The Chairman submitted the motion for the suspension of the Standing Rules to the Chamber and it was
declared carried on the voices.
Motion moved
223/2014-15
At that juncture, Councillor Milton DICK moved, seconded by Councillor Helen ABRAHAMS—
That the Lord Mayor urgently take this opportunity to announce, as an act of reconciliation, a commitment to
the Aboriginal community that Council will provide them with a long-term lease of the Council-owned Jaggara
(Jagera) Hall at South Brisbane.
Chairman:
Debate.
Councillor DICK:
Thank you, Madam Chair. I thank the LORD MAYOR and I thank the Council
for allowing this important debate. I have outlined why this is urgent. Today I
want this Council to act as one. We need, as a Council, which we haven't done
before, to address this issue. We have just heard from the LORD MAYOR today
in Question Time that he is serious about this offer. Well, this is the further step
in actually sending that clear message.
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
- 10 I would like to think that we can negotiate right here, right now. We have
members of the indigenous community here today. Today I would encourage the
LORD MAYOR to sit down with those leaders, listen to what they say, and take
action. It is no secret that for around 10 years the community has been waiting
for action on this. It has been long overdue. We know that the world leaders will
be arriving in Brisbane to actually address a whole range of issues. Well, when
it comes to reconciliation, when it comes to the acknowledgement and the deep
and abiding commitment and connection to that land at Musgrave Park, where
the hall and surround is, we know that connection is deep and enduring.
Well, today, I am delighted if the LNP will be supporting this motion because
all we've seen is talk so far. All we've seen is: we will get back to you. Well,
today is that further step forward, where we know that the indigenous
community is waiting for this deal. We know that the LORD MAYOR has
promised a lot over the years. Through the advocacy of the local councillor,
Councillor Helen ABRAHAMS, who has stood shoulder to shoulder with the
community, alongside other representatives, like the member for South
Brisbane, Jackie Trad. Well, today is a further step forward.
We just heard today the importance of naming CityCats and vessels. Well, time
is critical, and we want to see action. The indigenous community want and
deserve to see action. They need that commitment, and I am delighted to see that
we will see this in place before G20 because there can be nothing more
important, nothing more important, than sending that very clear message across
the globe, that when those leaders arrive on our doorstep, right here, right next
to where the G20 is occurring, that this Council stands shoulder to shoulder with
the indigenous community.
Madam Chair, this is a historic day. This is an important day for the indigenous
community. I thank the LORD MAYOR for his support for this motion, and I
look forward to the next step to ensure that this becomes a reality.
Chairman:
Further debate; LORD MAYOR.
LORD MAYOR:
Madam Chairman, there was nothing historic about this resolution. This
resolution mirrors what has been on the table now by me for the last two years.
Again, we can pass this resolution—
Councillor interjecting.
Chairman:
Order!
LORD MAYOR:
We'll support this resolution today, because it absolutely mirrors what is on the
table. What is going to happen, though, with the governance? Do you want me
to impose the governance rules? Well, I am not going to. If the indigenous
community of this city are going to have a lease, they have to establish their
own governance. Now, there was an initial committee that was set up as a result
of one of the meetings that I had with the elders and other entities within the
indigenous communities which set a committee of three in place to have a look
at this issue.
For various reasons—and all for good reasons in their own right—the committee
seemed to collapse. Nothing seemed to advance. So I called a meeting together.
I had heard nothing. I called a meeting last year. We had it upstairs, and people
came, and we debated this issue again: what was going to be the governance
arrangements? Who is going to do what in terms of that governing of the hall?
So, again, I await that.
You made certain references today, Councillor DICK, in relation to Jagera Hall.
As a Council, we were advised that Mr Ian Curr was going to be the point of
contact and the spokesperson in relation to BASE, the Brisbane Aboriginal
Sovereign Embassy. As part and parcel of that, we were in contact via this
Council with Mr Curr in relation to Jagera Hall. Back on 21 October we had an
email back from him. That email said, 'Thanks, Michelle, the Brisbane
Aboriginal Sovereign granny's group has found alternative accommodation.'
That is the reality.
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
- 11 We've got to get fair dinkum here. This will be available to the indigenous
community. All I want to know is: who is going to be responsible for the
governance, what the governance arrangements are? Then it is all yours. Very,
very simple. But you guys have got to get on with it. You've got to get
organised, and away we go from there.
Chairman:
Further debate; Councillor ABRAHAMS.
Councillor ABRAHAMS:
Thank you, Madam Chair. I enter the debate to support the motion that Council
must act so that the Aboriginal community is given a hall, Jagera Hall, as it is on
Aboriginal land that they have a strong relationship to, and which they have
been seeking from Council for more than 10 years in my experience.
So, knowing that history, I find it very difficult to accept the LORD MAYOR's
comments. He has said that he has been working on the handover for two years,
and he has now just accepted a letter saying they have found an alternative
location—that is exactly the inference of what he said—that there was an
alternative location, so he washed his hands of all of the meetings and all of the
negotiations that he has had. But he still is committed in his heart to have Jagera
Hall given to the Aboriginal community.
Well, there is history of the Aboriginal community in Musgrave Park. It means
that you've got to sit down, not with white person and Council's constraints on
what the agreement looks like, but to sit down with the Aboriginal community,
the broad Aboriginal community, to define how they would wish the
governance—not a one point contact for Council, because that's how we work,
but that doesn’t work that way with the aboriginal community. To work out how
the Aboriginal community wish to have governance, how the Aboriginal
community wishes to do it.
Do you know what, LORD MAYOR? You might even say: we give the hall to
the Aboriginal community so that, within a certain period of time, they then
deliver the governance structure to Council that we can accept. Once they've got
the hall, once they're in there, once they actually can come together and identify
with that parcel of land, that will, I believe, get rid of many of the blocks that are
in the way of the community. So there is more than one way to deliver a
commitment if you are really passionate about delivering it. That is to say: we
will try a new way so that the commitment of the Aboriginal community having
that parcel of land is delivered.
It is certainly not good enough to say: well, I've been trying for two years, but
they didn’t come back to me. LORD MAYOR, if we said that as councillors to
our constituents, they'd laugh at us because they expect us to get out and do the
work for them. Absolutely. For them and with them. This is actually an indirect
way of blaming the Aboriginal community because they're not coming into our
meetings, our way, our timeframe. I reject that.
LORD MAYOR, this must be more than token. If your side have voted for and
support this action, it means you have to designate the same amount of listening
commitment as you are to building a tunnel in our city, to achieve this outcome.
It is a matter of priority. It is a matter of time. It is a matter of respect for the
Aboriginal community, and what they wish. LORD MAYOR, please join us and
have a wholehearted commitment to achieving this. If we've got your support,
Council can do it very quickly, and we should do it.
Chairman:
Further debate—
Public Gallery interjection.
Chairman:
Order!
Public Gallery interjection.
Chairman:
No, resume your seat. Please resume your seat or leave the gallery.
Public Gallery interjection.
Chairman:
Mr Watts, please resume your seat or leave the gallery. There are rules that
apply to the Public Gallery and to interference of this meeting.
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
- 12 Public Gallery interjection.
Chairman:
Sir, you have the right to apply to address this Chamber, as does everybody else,
as did the two gentlemen who were here earlier. That is the process. That is the
due process that this Chamber runs by.
Councillor DICK, do you wish to sum up? Councillor JOHNSTON.
Councillor JOHNSTON:
Yes, Madam Chairman, I rise to speak briefly on this motion. I am a little
concerned at what I have heard here today. I am also concerned with the obvious
level of concern in the gallery for the people that have attended about this issue.
I think that I really feel that we should be listening to their concerns. I hope that
there are other speakers who will speak, because if this Council will not grant
indulgence to allow them to speak, then I think we as elected officials have an
obligation to speak on their behalf.
I understand there are rules in this place, and you rigorously apply them to me
week after week, but when members of this community have issues of
importance to consider before this Chamber, I believe they deserve to be heard.
Councillor interjecting.
Councillor JOHNSTON:
So I raise my voice in support of the motion before us today. I know this area is
in Councillor ABRAHAM's ward. She has spoken very clearly about the
importance of this issue to her community and to the Aboriginal elders in
Brisbane. I would hope that the LORD MAYOR will act rather than spend two
years talking or doing nothing—I am not sure actually what has happened. But
the issue here is, with leasing issues generally in this city, it takes years to get a
resolution. Four years a group in my area has been waiting for a lease. Two
years for the indigenous community.
There is a problem with the way that community leasing is being managed in
this city. It is not a timely process. In this case there are cultural issues that
clearly need to be considered out of respect for the traditional owners of the
land. I think that this is a unique case, and I agree completely with Councillor
ABRAHAMS and Councillor DICK that it is an issue of leadership. Both the
LORD MAYOR and Councillor ADAMS—as this is her area of
responsibility—to ensure that this progresses from discussion to action.
I have heard the LORD MAYOR say here today that when the indigenous
community nominate the terms for management of this lease, that he will
approve it. I urge you, I urge the people in the gallery today to tell the LORD
MAYOR what they want. He has said he will approve it. It is in your hands. Ask
for it. You have the support of all of the councillors in this Chamber.
I would ask the LORD MAYOR—good on you—and if you want someone to
table it, I am happy to come up and get it and table it. But what I will say,
LORD MAYOR, is talking and inaction for two years does not progress the
issue. There is a systemic problem with community leasing and the timeliness of
it in this city. I would urge you to exercise leadership and to ensure this matter is
progressed as soon as possible.
Chairman:
Further debate; Councillor DICK, would you care to sum up?
Councillor DICK:
Look, thank you, Madam Chair. I am glad that this motion has been put on the
agenda today. I am glad the media are here covering this issue, because we have
been waiting—the indigenous community have been waiting. If there is one
thing that is going to come out of this meeting today, one thing that we were
quite happy to hold this meeting up for a horse race, we need to ensure that the
community is heard. Through this motion today, I sincerely hope it is a very,
very small way forward—
Chairman:
To the Chair, please, Councillor DICK.
Councillor DICK:
You don't want me looking at the gallery, Madam Chair?
Chairman:
You know the rules of this place, Councillor DICK.
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
- 13 Councillor DICK:
I think that says it all. Madam Chair, I think that says it all. What I want out of
today is a step forward, a step forward that we have been waiting for for two
years.
With respect to you, LORD MAYOR, it is not good enough to say we have been
waiting for a phone call. Leadership does not sit and wait for a phone call. If you
are true to your word, you make the phone call, you leave this meeting now—I
am happy to support a suspension for the LORD MAYOR to walk a couple of
metres up to those stairs and meet with the community right here, right now.
LORD MAYOR, they are willing to talk to you. They have taken the effort to
come here today to have their voice heard. LORD MAYOR, they deserve their
voice heard.
Madam Chair, we will continue to keep supporting the indigenous community.
We will be beside them every step of the way to make sure this isn’t just a
promise; it becomes a reality. This motion is the next step forward, but I
sincerely hope that we will not hear any more excuses like we have heard from
the LNP for the last couple of years, that we see real leadership for the
indigenous community in our city.
LORD MAYOR:
Point of order, Madam Chairman.
Chairman:
Yes, LORD MAYOR.
LORD MAYOR:
Madam Chairman, before you put the motion, I was wondering whether the
opposition may want to amend their motion, because there is no such hall as the
one stated within the motion put forward by the Opposition. Could they perhaps
amend it to read it's correct spelling of J-A-G-E-R-A. It is an official Council
record; I just recommend that you correct the spelling.
Chairman:
LORD MAYOR, I think we—
Councillor DICK:
Madam Chair, I am advised that that is Aboriginal spelling, but if the LORD
MAYOR wants it in non-Aboriginal—
Councillors interjecting.
Councillor DICK:
If the LORD MAYOR wants it—
Chairman:
Order!
Councillor DICK:
No, I am serious.
Chairman:
Order!
Councillor DICK:
If the LORD MAYOR wants it in non-Aboriginal spelling, I am happy to have it
in those terms.
Councillor interjecting.
Chairman:
Councillor JOHNSTON! Order!
Councillor DICK:
Just on the point of order, I do point out to the LORD MAYOR that that is
indigenous language for that hall, Madam Chairman.
Chairman:
Thank you, Councillor DICK.
I will put the motion as it is written, and I guess in brackets we could add J-a-ge-r-a if that is the name by which it is known within Brisbane City Council. So,
in the Minutes, that's how it will be reported. I will put the motion.
The Chairman submitted the motion to the Chamber and it was declared carried on the voices.
Thereupon, Councillors Milton DICK and Helen ABRAHAMS immediately rose and called for a division,
which resulted in the motion being declared carried unanimously.
The voting was as follows:
AYES: 26 -
The Right Honourable the LORD MAYOR, Councillor Graham QUIRK,
DEPUTY MAYOR,
Councillor
Adrian SCHRINNER,
and
Councillors
Krista ADAMS,
Matthew BOURKE,
Amanda COOPER,
Margaret de WIT,
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
- 14 Vicki HOWARD, Steven HUANG, Fiona KING, Geraldine KNAPP, Kim MARX,
Peter MATIC,
Ian McKENZIE,
David McLACHLAN,
Ryan MURPHY,
Angela OWEN-TAYLOR, Julian SIMMONDS and Andrew WINES, and the Leader
of
the
OPPOSITION,
Councillor
Milton DICK,
and
Councillors
Helen ABRAHAMS, Peter CUMMING, Kim FLESSER, Steve GRIFFITHS,
Victoria NEWTON, Shayne SUTTON and Nicole JOHNSTON.
NOES: Nil.
Chairman:
Further questions of the LORD MAYOR; Councillor OWEN-TAYLOR.
Question 3
Councillor OWEN-TAYLOR: Thank you, Madam Chairman; my question this afternoon is for the Chairman of
Finance, Economic Development and Administration Committee, Councillor
SIMMONDS. Brisbane is Australia's new world city and the G20 Leaders’
Summit host for 2014. Can you please outline the economic benefits of the
Leaders’ Summit and the recently announced G20 projects?
Councillor SIMMONDS:
Certainly, thank you very much, Madam Chairman, and thank you to Councillor
OWEN-TAYLOR for the question. The G20 is certainly shaping up as an
exciting opportunity for Brisbane as we prepare to take centre stage for three
days next week. I want to echo the LORD MAYOR's words as we lead into the
summit, that Brisbane residents are encouraged to take the opportunity to
celebrate and participate in the events surrounding G20, including continuing to
enjoy their city next week while the summit is being held.
We also encourage, of course, local businesses to open across the weekend and
claim their share of the direct economic benefits from the delegates, visitors and
security personnel that will be in attendance. Based on the average visitor
spending data, the direct benefit is estimated at some $20 million over the three
days, and this includes hotels, restaurants and related retail. When combined
with the other estimated indirect benefits, G20 will add approximately $100
million in benefits to our local economy. This is equivalent of 10-years' worth of
the Brisbane International Tournament, for example.
But many more of the benefits that our city will receive can't be readily
quantified because, quite simply, they are priceless. To have 4,000 journalists in
our city, to have our city image beamed to two-thirds of the world's population
repeatedly over the three days, to have the name Brisbane mentioned alongside
the leaders and outcomes that people around the world respect is a once in a
generation opportunity.
But like all opportunities, you get out what you put in. It is up to all Brisbane
residents to assist to ensure that the image we put forward is one of a vibrant
New World City. Residents, of course, can be assured that this Administration
has laid the groundwork that is required for a successful summit. In the lead-up
to the summit, we have hosted global journalists to ensure that stories profiling
Brisbane as the host of G20 have run in the US, Canada, UK, China, Singapore,
Argentina, India, Indonesia, Brazil, Japan, Hong Kong and Korea, just to name a
few.
We have supplemented that with our Choose Brisbane campaign, with over
3,000 billboards having appeared in places like Hong Kong, Guangzhou,
shanghai, Nanjing, Tokyo, Nagoya, Osaka, Singapore, London, Paris, Madrid,
Barcelona, Berlin and Sao Paulo.
To highlight Brisbane as the G20 host, to reinforce our place as Australia's New
World City, and to target decision makers in business, investment, conventions
and international education. We have also, of course, worked to activate the city,
with wi-fi being rolled out in the Queen Street Mall, Southbank, Victoria
Bridge, the Valley Mall and Mt Coot-tha. Between these locations, more than
65,000 users are logging on every month, many of them sharing stories and
images of them enjoying everything that our beautiful city has to offer.
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
- 15 We have also, of course, supported and been a partner in the Colour Me
Brisbane lightshow running until this weekend. The program runs from 6 pm
until 11pm and lights up 32 sites and buildings, with lights, projections and
lasers across the city, including a special light and sound display at the Treasury
Hotel.
As we get closer to the summit itself, we will of course have the world's first
Global Café. The Global Café will ensure that, in the days leading up to the
G20, Brisbane is at the centre of a global conversation about defining issues,
including improving human life, tourism's new frontiers, the digital age, cities of
the future, and powering future economies. The program will feature up to 70
speakers, many of whom are global names that are speaking in Brisbane for the
first time, engaging with local businesses and with residents.
Then, of course, after the summit, we have a record calendar of events with
which we can use to maximise visitation from those who learn about our
beautiful city through the G20 and its related media coverage back in their home
country. That calendar includes events such as the Asian Football Cup, the
Cricket World Cup, the Asia Pacific Cities Summit, and of course the upcoming
Asia Pacific Screen Awards and Film Festival.
So that just leaves, of course, during the summit, when we will need the help of
the whole of Team Brisbane to ensure that the city remains bustling, that the city
is open for business, and it is up to all of us to ensure that we support our local
restaurants, and that we still go about our daily business. Most of the
opportunities will still be available to us. Feel free to enjoy South Bank, to run
through South Bank, go about your daily business so that our guests can see
Brisbane for the wonderful city that we are.
Through all of this, I note that it has been the position of the Australian Labor
Party next to me to oppose all of these initiatives, to be negative about the G20.
Unfortunately they have made very little effort to get the real information out to
their own residents.
Councillors interjecting.
Chairman:
Order!
Councillor SIMMONDS:
But not only that, all of this leveraging that is being conducted by this
Administration, both in the lead-up—
Councillors interjecting.
Chairman:
Order!
Councillor SIMMONDS:
—and after the G20—
Councillors interjecting.
Chairman:
Order!
Councillor SIMMONDS:
—all of the leveraging outcomes, all of the leveraging outcomes have been
opposed by those opposite, and I hope—
Councillors interjecting.
Chairman:
Order!
Councillor SIMMONDS:
—I hope that they have a sudden change—
Chairman:
Councillor SUTTON!
Councillor SIMMONDS:
—I hope that they have a sudden change of heart, and join Team Brisbane—
Chairman:
Councillor SIMMONDS—
Councillor SIMMONDS:
Join us, join Team Brisbane to support the G20.
Chairman:
—your time has expired. Councillor DICK.
Question 4
Councillor DICK:
Thank you, Madam Chair; my question is to the LORD MAYOR. Can you
clarify and outline today which elements of the State Government's draft
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
- 16 Planning and Development Bill 2014 you opposed, and in the interests of open
and accountable government, will you table the submission made by the
Brisbane City Council, or do you want to keep this a secret?
LORD MAYOR:
Madam Chairman, I will take that question on notice and provide details of that
next week.
Chairman:
Thank you. further questions; Councillor HUANG.
Question 5
Councillor HUANG:
Thank you, Madam Chair, my question is to the Chairman of Public and Active
Transport Committee, Councillor MATIC. G20 is fast approaching. Can you
update the Chamber on how public and active transport is assisting with the
G20?
Councillor MATIC:
Thank you, Madam Chairman, and I thank Councillor HUANG for the question.
Of course, as Councillor HUANG was saying, and as we heard earlier from
Councillor SIMMONDS, we are quickly approaching the G20. As the LORD
MAYOR has previously stated and continues to say, Brisbane is open for
business. We have a bustling city centre, and as such we want to continue to
make sure that Brisbane residents can enjoy that while G20 is being undertaken.
G20, of course, is an enormous opportunity for Brisbane, and we have embraced
it wholeheartedly as a Council and in conjunction with the State and Federal
Governments, because it is good for Brisbane. It is good for business; it is good
for the prosperity of our city; it is good for positioning Brisbane in the eyes of
the world. That is why it is important that we present it here.
But it is equally important that we make sure that, during the disruption of G20,
we do as much as we can for those Brisbane residents who want to be able to
travel to the city because, as Councillor SIMMONDS was saying in his answer
before, there is so much going on. There is so much going on right now, there is
so much that will be going on during that period as well. We have traders and
large operators within Queen Street that will be open. The Myer Centre,
Wintergarden and other centres as well. So that's about their commitment to the
city as well.
So, from a public transport perspective, we're doing as much as we can under
the circumstances to be able to provide and continue those facilities. From a bus
perspective, services will continue as normal up until 7pm on Thursday 13
November. From that period onwards, there will be some changes to the
network which residents need to be aware of. So I certainly would urge residents
to continue to look at the G20 website—G20.gov—and also to go to TransLink's
website as well to look at those timetable changes.
So, up until 7pm, normal services, but from that point onwards, some of our key
busway stations, the works will be undertaken on road in Roma Street, King
George Square and the Cultural Centre. But further details of course are
available on the website as well. So, from Friday 14th to Sunday 16th, the buses
will be operating on a public holiday timetable. What we are asking residents to
do is to add extra time to their travel because, in conjunction with that timetable,
there will also be disruptions caused by various motorcades through that time.
But what is important to note is the significant amount of work that Brisbane
Transport has undertaken with both the State and Federal Governments to
ensure that we have connectivity leading to the CBD. There are a number of
hubs that have been positioned outside of the city to ensure that there is ease of
access to those hubs outside of the CBD and then making sure that once people
come to those hubs, they'll be able to then catch a service, a high-frequency bus
shuttle service into the CBD. So there's a combination of services that will be
operated through bus shuttles, but also these different locations at Toowong,
Milton, Upper Edward Street, Woolloongabba, Boggo Road, at UQ (University
of Queensland), and Fortitude Valley that will also provide that extra level of
connectivity.
The aim, of course, is to continue to provide that level of service on a public
holiday timetable. So people who still want to come to the city—and I certainly
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
- 17 urge people to do so. There is so much that will be on during the G20 period, on
top of the normal shopping that people want to undertake within the CBD. I urge
them to continue to utilise those services, but to just simply provide that extra
time.
The same applies for our CityCats as well, Madam Chairman. The CityCats will
operate as per the normal weekend and public holiday timetable. There may be
minor delays for some if a motorcade, for example, will be travelling over a
bridge within that inner-city stop, between the Story Bridge and the Go Between
Bridge. But if there is no motorcade passing, then the Cats are free to be able to
travel in the ordinary course as that program provides.
We can see clearly that, by being able to utilise and provide these services in
that regulated format throughout this weekend period, we will, of course, be able
to continue to provide that service. There may be some further delays on
Monday, but only briefly up until about lunchtime as the final members of the
various delegations leave our city. What is important is that we continue to
closely monitor the services, working very closely with TransLink, and our
drivers as well, to be able to address the issues of motorcades passing, to keep
our residents informed.
Certainly I urge people to be able to go to the website for G20 and TransLink as
well, and between those two, we can plan ahead to be able to conduct the dayto-day business that people need to over the weekend within the city, while at
the same time enjoying the unique experience of G20 that Brisbane has for the
first time experienced.
Chairman:
Further questions; councillor DICK.
Question 6
Councillor DICK:
Thank you, Madam Chair; my question is to the LORD MAYOR. You claim
you don't know anything about the State Government's draft Planning and
Development Bill. Let me tell you, it will allow for the State Government to call
in powers on development applications before residents even know they exist.
Will you publicly today oppose one of the most aggressive grabs for power by
any State Government which will take away the rights of Brisbane residents to
have a say in developments that will affect them?
LORD MAYOR:
Madam Chairman, I have already answered this question. I said that I would
indicate to Councillor DICK next week what is in the submission. Can I say that
State Governments have always had powers. As we know, the State Government
could abolish the Brisbane City Council at midnight tonight if they wanted to.
They always have had those powers. That is the reality. So, Councillor DICK,
while he might get a great deal of grunt in the style of question that he asks, the
fact of the matter is powers have always existed.
Councillor DICK:
Point of order, Madam Chair.
LORD MAYOR:
The State have always had powers along those lines.
Chairman:
Point of order, LORD MAYOR; yes, Councillor DICK.
LORD MAYOR:
I know the LORD MAYOR is unaware of the new Bill, but Madam Chair—
Chairman:
What's your point of order?
Councillor DICK:
Well, these are new—
Councillors interjecting.
Councillor DICK:
These are new powers.
Chairman:
No, what's your point of order?
Councillor DICK:
The question is, through you, Madam Chairman, I've asked the LORD MAYOR
will he oppose these, not refer back to the submission. Specifically, this new
grab for power, will he oppose it, yes or no, and I ask you to draw him back to
that question.
Chairman:
Thank you, Councillor DICK; LORD MAYOR.
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
- 18 LORD MAYOR:
Madam Chairman, I have answered the question.
Chairman:
Thank you. That ends Question Time.
Councillor JOHNSTON:
Point of order, Madam Chairman.
Chairman:
Yes, Councillor JOHNSTON.
MOTION FOR SUSPENSION OF STANDING RULES:
224/2014-15
At that juncture, Councillor Nicole JOHNSTON moved, seconded by Councillor Steve GRIFFITHS, that the
Standing Rules be suspended to allow the moving of the following motion
That the Public and Active Transport Committee meeting is rescheduled from 10 am on 11 November to 1 pm
on 11 November 2014 to enable Councillors to attend Remembrance Day services.
Chairman:
You've got three minutes to indicate urgency, Councillor JOHNSTON.
Councillor JOHNSTON:
Yes, thank you, Madam Chairman. I have moved this motion today because, in
the committee today, when this matter was raised, the Chairman of the Public
and Active Transport Committee, Councillor Peter MATIC, refused to even
allow the motion to be put to the Committee members. That is a clear breach of
the rules in that committee, and what it has meant is that we have no other time,
other than today's meeting, to move this motion so that all councillors can attend
Remembrance Day services in their local areas.
This is the centenary of Anzac this year; there are very significant events being
held around the city, and most of those events start at approximately 10.30, so
the minute of silence can be held at 11. This committee goes from 10 to 10.30.
My understanding, Madam Chairman, is other committees did undertake this
change to reflect the importance of Remembrance Day services, and it is
extremely disappointing that Councillor MATIC refused to even allow the
motion to be put to the committee today.
It is urgent, Madam Chairman, because if it is not changed at this Council
meeting, the Public and Active Transport Committee meeting will go ahead, and
councillors may be unable to attend—including Councillor MATIC—
Remembrance Day services that are so important for our community. I would
ask that the LORD MAYOR supports this motion before us today.
It is really disappointing that Councillor MATIC refused to consider it, and this
now is the opportunity for this Council to say to our community, to the RSLs
(Returned and Services League) and to everybody in Brisbane that this Council
does not just stop for the Melbourne Cup; it stops for our veterans and their
families. I urge all councillors to support this urgency motion, and we will have
a very short and quick debate regarding the substantive motion before us.
Chairman:
Councillor JOHNSTON, before I put this motion to suspend Standing Rules, I
have a concern with it in that, one, it's an issue that really should be addressed
outside this meeting, but also you can't just say you’re going to change it to a
certain time, because there are implications in terms of the CEO's staff being
available, and that needs to be arranged as well. So I have some concern about
this Chamber organising or putting through this motion in this way. It is really
not the way it should be done. But I will put the motion for the suspension of
Standing Rules to allow the motion to be put.
The Chairman submitted the motion for the suspension of the Standing Rules to the Chamber and it was
declared lost on the voices.
Thereupon, Councillors Nicole JOHNSTON and Steve GRIFFITHS immediately rose and called for a division,
which resulted in the motion being declared lost.
The voting was as follows:
AYES: 8 -
The Leader of the OPPOSITION, Councillor Milton DICK, and Councillors
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
- 19 Helen ABRAHAMS, Peter CUMMING, Kim FLESSER, Steve GRIFFITHS,
Victoria NEWTON, Shayne SUTTON and Nicole JOHNSTON.
NOES: 18 -
The Right Honourable the LORD MAYOR, Councillor Graham QUIRK,
DEPUTY MAYOR,
Councillor
Adrian SCHRINNER,
and
Councillors
Krista ADAMS,
Matthew BOURKE,
Amanda COOPER,
Margaret de WIT,
Vicki HOWARD, Steven HUANG, Fiona KING, Geraldine KNAPP, Kim MARX,
Peter MATIC,
Ian McKENZIE,
David McLACHLAN,
Ryan MURPHY,
Angela OWEN-TAYLOR, Julian SIMMONDS and Andrew WINES.
CONSIDERATION OF COMMITTEE REPORTS:
ESTABLISHMENT AND COORDINATION COMMITTEE
The Right Honourable the LORD MAYOR (Councillor Graham QUIRK), Chairman of the Establishment and
Coordination Committee, moved, seconded by the DEPUTY MAYOR (Councillor Adrian SCHRINNER), that
the report of the meeting of that Committee held on 27 October 2014, be adopted.
MOTION FOR WITHDRAWAL OF CLAUSE A:
225/2014-15
It was moved by the LORD MAYOR, seconded by the DEPUTY MAYOR that Clause A, HEALTH, SAFETY
AND AMENITY AMENDING LOCAL LAW 2014, of the report be withdrawn.
Chairman:
Debate, LORD MAYOR.
LORD MAYOR:
Thanks very much, Madam Chairman; so I am just debating the withdrawal of
item A.
Chairman:
Yes, just the explanation.
LORD MAYOR:
Madam Chairman, the intention is that this item will come back to the Chamber
next Tuesday. There is an error in the report, so it will be corrected and come
back here for debate next Tuesday.
Chairman:
Any further debate on the withdrawal motion? Councillor JOHNSTON.
Councillor JOHNSTON:
Yes, Madam Chairman, there is. If I've just understood what's happened, the
LORD MAYOR has announced there is a problem with item A in the E&C
Report. He has not told us what that problem is. He has not told us what has to
be fixed. He has not told us how it has got to this point in the Council process
that something that is wrong has been presented to Councillors and is now being
withdrawn without any reasonable explanation to us about why. That is
completely unreasonable.
That is not the only problem with the papers before us today, which actually say
some things have been tabled but they haven't been tabled—
Chairman:
Councillor JOHNSTON, we are talking about clause A of the E&C Report only.
Councillor JOHNSTON:
Yes, and I am—
Chairman:
Well, stick to that.
Councillor JOHNSTON:
Yes, and that's what I am saying. It is not the only mistake. But what I don't
understand is if something is wrong here, why has there not been advice before
3.40pm in the afternoon on the day of the issue to all the councillors in this
place, out of courtesy and respect, to say this is the problem, this is what we are
going to do to fit it, and we will be doing whatever it is that needs to be done.
Because it is not good enough that time after time this Administration presents
the wrong Council papers to this Chamber.
So I hope in summing up the LORD MAYOR will tell us why this paper is
being withdrawn, what he is doing to fix the mistake, what is coming back to the
Chamber next week for Council to vote on, and what steps he has put in place to
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
- 20 make sure that this problem does not happen again. It is a simple process that,
half-way into today's meeting, we're being told there's a problem. Did he only
find out in the last two minutes? I strongly suspect that's not the case. It is not
good enough, and I would like the LORD MAYOR to do the Chamber the
courtesy of explaining what the problems are here and what he is going to do to
fix them.
Chairman:
Further debate; Councillor DICK.
Councillor DICK:
Thanks, Madam Chair. I've got a slightly different approach to this. Look, I
don't have an objection to this withdrawal motion today, but I do want to place
on record, in coming up to seven years as a representative, during the time of
Campbell Newman, during the LNP super majorities which we have now, I'm
unaware of this ever happening. So this is a bit of a precedent in my time. It may
have happened over the last seven years that it might have slipped in, but I can't
recall.
But I've got a couple of issues in terms of the process here. There's clearly
something wrong with this law. There's clearly something through the drafting
process or through the documentation, whether the dates are wrong—I am pretty
used to sloppy work by the LNP—particularly under Councillor COOPER—or
any other planning provisions. We know there's a whole range of—
Councillors interjecting.
Councillor DICK:
Yes, well City Plan is one example, and I'd like to hear from the Chairman,
Councillor McLACHLAN. We get a lot of lectures from Councillor
McLACHLAN about him being the guru on everything about everything. Well,
now is your time, Councillor McLACHLAN; own up. What did you stuff up?
What did we make the error on? Don't blame the Council officers. You're in
charge. So that's the first point.
Second point: what else is going on in Civic Cabinet? Everyone is sitting around
just signing the documents, looking forward to the ratepayer-funded lunch,
worrying about which documents—
Chairman:
Councillor DICK, I find that comment offensive, and I ask you to withdraw it.
Councillor DICK:
Sure, Madam Chair, I withdraw. Well, we know Civic Cabinet has a free lunch
paid for by the ratepayers, and I want to know, was this a case of people wanting
to get to that lunch before, because they realised there was sloppy work when
this came through and they didn’t have their eye on the ball? I know the LORD
MAYOR has a lot of balls up in the air, but maybe you'd think someone else in
Civic Cabinet would read the documents and not put the LORD MAYOR in this
position. It's embarrassing.
It's embarrassing for the LORD MAYOR to have to get up and say, look, we've
made a huge mistake here. These are laws. These impact on ratepayers. Thank
goodness somebody in the army of people inside that office of the LORD
MAYOR actually read the papers weeks and weeks and weeks after this actually
came to Council, so what are they hiding? Why are we withdrawing this? It
could be just a simple typo; that's okay. I'll let you off the hook. Not a problem.
But what is it?
Why have we got a situation where this, if it wasn’t picked up, could have
serious consequences. This leads to my third point: what else is going on? What
are the procedures put into place to manage this? Who picked it up? How did
they find it? Was Councillor McLACHLAN just simply asleep and it all
happened around him? What is going on?
Whilst I have no objection supporting this correction of the LNP's mistake, I
really think we all, as elected representatives and ratepayers, deserve a bit more
explanation than, oh gee, we're bringing it in next week. Come on, you need to
do a lot better than that. I know the LNP are completely arrogant and drunk on
power with their super majority, but that doesn’t give you the green light or the
excuses to simply just wheel in and wheel out laws as you see fit.
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
- 21 I can tell you: there's a lot of mistakes in item B as well. I hope you've checked
that. But anyway, that's for another chapter, Madam Chair, and that's a big
chapter, that one. The political correctness in this Council is going mad again.
But this item A that we are dealing with today, I really hope we get some
explanation. What is the reason why? Not just say we're going to bring it in next
week, trust me. Well, we've trusted you to bring this in; the Civic Cabinet has
that power, and you stuffed that up.
So, Madam Chair, let's get a bit of honesty; let's move on from this, but let's get
a decent, decent explanation, so next week we're not caught up in the same mess
and lazy LNP politicians not doing their job.
Chairman:
Further debate; Councillor FLESSER.
Councillor FLESSER:
Thank you, Madam Chair. Without any theatrics, I am simply asking that there
be some sort of explanation, because clearly what's going on is that, between
now and next Tuesday, there's going to be a lot of speculation about what was
stuffed up. The worst thing that could happen in this situation would be for me
to sit down and for the LORD MAYOR not to give some explanation, say
something on what's actually wrong with the local law that they've proposed to
bring here today. It might be just a typo, that's fine, but there needs to be some
explanation to stop any of the speculation, so that Councillors here, when they
vote to either knock this back or support it, they know what they're voting for.
Chairman:
Further debate; LORD MAYOR?
Councillors interjecting.
Chairman:
I will put the motion for the withdrawal of—order! I will put the motion for the
withdrawal of clause A of the Establishment and Coordination Committee
report.
Upon being submitted to the chamber the motion for the withdrawal of Clause A was declared carried on the
voices.
Thereupon, Councillors Milton DICK and Helen ABRAHAMS immediately rose and called for a division,
which resulted in the motion being declared carried unanimously.
The voting was as follows:
AYES: 25 -
The Right Honourable the LORD MAYOR, Councillor Graham QUIRK,
DEPUTY MAYOR,
Councillor
Adrian SCHRINNER,
and
Councillors
Krista ADAMS,
Matthew BOURKE,
Amanda COOPER,
Margaret de WIT,
Vicki HOWARD, Steven HUANG, Fiona KING, Geraldine KNAPP, Kim MARX,
Peter MATIC,
Ian McKENZIE,
David McLACHLAN,
Ryan MURPHY,
Angela OWEN-TAYLOR, Julian SIMMONDS and Andrew WINES, and the Leader
of
the
OPPOSITION,
Councillor
Milton DICK,
and
Councillors
Helen ABRAHAMS, Peter CUMMING, Kim FLESSER, Steve GRIFFITHS,
Victoria NEWTON and Shayne SUTTON.
NOES: Nil.
ABSTENTIONS: 1 -
Councillor Nicole JOHNSTON.
Chairman:
LORD MAYOR.
LORD MAYOR:
Yes, thank you very much, Madam Chairman. Just prior to moving on to item B
before us today, I wanted to just make a few comments on some other issues if I
may. Firstly, I want to acknowledge the fact that the Colour Me Brisbane
campaign is running across the city at the moment. That is an opportunity for
people to come in and explore the CBD and take full advantage of it. So I just
want to indicate that that is happening and trust that all councillors will be out to
advise their local residents of that.
The other thing I wanted to mention today was in relation to a resolution that
went before the Local Government Association conference last week. This was
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
- 22 a matter which was referencing dog control. It was referencing the fact that, at
the moment, the only mechanism that Council has to deal with certain matters is
through the courts. I note that there was a resolution which was carried. It was
then forwarded to the Local Government Minister. The Local Government
Minister has already indicated some views in relation to this matter, words to the
effect, that it be kept on a short leash.
I just want to say that I have been out on the weekend around this city listening
to people, asking people their view in relation to the matter. I want to make it
absolutely clear that this Council will not be—regardless of what the State
government might or might not do—this Council—
Councillors interjecting.
Chairman:
Order!
LORD MAYOR:
This Council would not be progressing any local law along those lines. It will
not happen. I think there is utter confusion out there in relation to—
Councillor interjecting.
Chairman:
Councillor JOHNSTON!
LORD MAYOR:
There is utter confusion out there as to what the motion was about. But that is
the case. The last thing that I want to do is to have people concerned that
somehow their watchdog or whatever—they might be subject to a fine if that
dog barks at the fence. That was never the intention of this. But I accept that that
is a view that people think it is about. It is not going to proceed. I want to make
that absolutely clear.
Moving on to item B—just in relation firstly to the previous item dealt with—
Councillors interjecting.
Chairman:
Order!
LORD MAYOR:
—of course, it is the Opposition's job also to look for errors. I note they couldn’t
pick anything up, so that will all be revealed next week. We'll all know—
Councillors interjecting.
Chairman:
Order!
LORD MAYOR:
You'll all know. You're always talking—
Chairman:
Order! Councillor SUTTON!
LORD MAYOR:
—about us—you've got to do a bit of homework too. Can I suggest—
Chairman:
Order!
LORD MAYOR:
—you've probably got a fair bit more time than we have to do that homework.
Councillor interjecting.
LORD MAYOR:
No, no, I wouldn’t—
Councillors interjecting.
Chairman:
Order!
LORD MAYOR:
I'd never go that far, Councillor DICK. I'd never go that far. I'm just simply
saying—
Chairman:
Order!
LORD MAYOR:
I'm just simply saying many jobs I have; doing your homework for you is not
one of them.
So, Madam Chairman, we move now to item B which is the Public Land and
Council Assets Local Law. This particular law presented today for approval by
this Council does reflect that Brisbane is a growing city—a growing city with
increasing demands. While there has been a lot of, again, attempts at a scare
campaign out there as to what all of this means, the reality is that, in the main,
people can utilise their parks in the same way that they always have.
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
- 23 However, if it is that there is going to be significant events held in parks, which
is public land, and people want that area of land reserved, that comes at a cost to
the ratepayers of this city to do that, to fence off an area for a particular event of
significant numbers. So this PLACA, as it is called for short, Public Land and
Council Assets Local Law, is very much designed to take those matters into
account.
But for the average person out there, enjoying their park in the way they always
have, life will go on without any change whatsoever. So, Madam Chairman, I
just wanted to make that very, very clear for everybody. The matter is here
before Council today. The documents are here for Councillors to make reference
to and comment upon. So it is with that degree of pleasure that I move that this
particular item be adopted.
Councillor MURPHY:
Seconded.
Chairman:
I'm just not sure. I think the DEPUTY MAYOR seconded it earlier, didn’t he?
Yes. No, it was seconded, thanks, Councillor MURPHY. Better to have two than
none. Councillor DICK.
Councillor DICK:
Thanks, Madam Chair, and really, really, this shouldn’t be Melbourne Cup day;
it's really damage-control day. I think that's what this is. Where do I start?
Where do I start?
This isn’t a good day for the LNP, we know that, and it is not surprising that one
of the most controversial laws that our city has seen is being snuck back in on
Melbourne Cup day. We know that; we know that, a bit like the backflip this
morning on the dogs, with Councillor ADAMS being slapped down. We know
that, with the Local Government Minister coming in. We know that this is the
day to wheel out all the bad news and this is no exception.
Now, the LORD MAYOR said in his comments, nothing is going to change. So,
why are we having a new local law? If nothing is going to change, why are we
having a new law? If everything is staying exactly the same, why would we do a
new local law?
LORD MAYOR:
Claim to be misrepresented, Madam Chair.
Chairman:
Thank you, LORD MAYOR.
Councillor DICK:
Oh, God, it goes from bad to worse. So, what the LORD MAYOR didn’t say—
he said he was out there in the community—did you hear that?
Councillor interjecting.
Councillor DICK:
What the LORD MAYOR didn’t refer to were the submissions which are the
mums and dads, the ones he was talking about, the ones that are going to be
directly impacted by this law, the ones that are going to feel the full force of this
law in a negative and regressive way.
So let's talk about point 20 of the clause about Council received 129 public
submissions. I correct that; there's a typo, of course, according to the summary
of submissions, there were 139. We can't even get that right in the actual
documentation. So, through you, Madam Chair, I just randomly ask: of those
139 submissions, how many do you think were in favour? Would you say
50/50? Would you say there'd be a good smattering, you know, the arguments to
and fro, some people in favour, some people against, we weren't really sure. In
round figures, just in round figures, how many do you think? There were a
grand total of five submissions out of 139—five submissions were supportive.
I think that says it all. I'll get back to the submissions, and I flag, I may need an
extension. I may need an extension. I've flagged it early but I bet they won't give
it to me once I start this. Nonetheless, Madam Chair, I'll push on.
When you look at the LNP State Government—and I'll come to what they had to
say about the law as well. Four government agencies made suggested
amendments—the Department of Transport and Main Roads (TMR), the
Department of Justice and Attorney-General (JAG), the Department of National
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
- 24 Parks, Recreation, Sport and Racing, and the Department of Local Government,
community recovery and resilience.
I know when we go and ask the State Government—you look at them and they
normally say no objections, right. Not with this law, Madam Chair; not with this
law. In fact, the Department of Transport and Main Roads put in a 19-page
submission. They raised things such as the key concerns about the busway under
King George Square and the Queen Street Mall bus station being captured as
part of parkland, which would restrict TransLink operations having a sign,
selling GoCards, limited TMR's operations by prohibiting a TMR car access to
malls.
To their credit, Transport and Main Roads also picked up several typos and
errors in the drafting of the local law. But the real killer in this—this is the LNP
State Government casting their eye over the LNP Council's law—Department of
Justice and Attorney-General, and I quote from the submission: “The
Department of Justice and Attorney-General is concerned that the information
required to disprove the accuracy of an account is solely within the knowledge
of the Council.
As currently drafted, this constitutes a deeming provision that reverses both the
legal and evidentiary onus. This raised fundamental legislative principle
concerns related to natural justice,” and the Department of Justice and AttorneyGeneral suggests that the provision should be instead drafted as a presumption
provision.
The Department of JAG queries whether this provision, as currently drafted, has
the potential to infringe on the rights of private landholders. So, huge problems
from the LNP State Government about the operations of this law. But it is not
just the LNP State Government which think this law is rubbish; so, too, do the
ratepayers and the citizens of Brisbane.
I am going to talk about five examples that are going to be captured from this
law. First of all, if a kindy and a childcare centre was to hold an Easter-egg hunt
in the park, Neighbourhood Watch Christmas break-up parties and picnics in the
park would be captured under this law; Bushcare planting days, where there can
be more than 20 people planting a natural area, the Stations of the Cross walk
around one of our Brisbane's iconic Dowse Lagoons with the Church of the
Sacred Cross, they would be captured under this law, and the St Pius School's
cross-country, which runs through the Banyo Memorial Park, would all be
captured for the first time underneath these new regressive laws.
They were quick to point out in the regulation it is not going to apply to
birthdays, because they felt the full force of the pain with talkback callers, media
inquiries, saying: which idiotic local government authority would wrap the city
up in red tape with new bureaucracy for a kid's birthday party? Enter the LNP
Council.
Well, Madam Chair, this is political correctness gone mad. But let me go
through what the submissions say: “Dear Mr Bourke, I do not agree with
proposed permit requirements for family gatherings in parks. This is red tape
nonsense. FYI, we are Liberal voters.” This is what they're saying in the
submissions: “As an academic with international experience in architectural and
urban study research, I find the idea of further regulating our public sphere as
reprehensible as it is ill-informed of what makes public space vibrant and
attractive. I have studied and researched what makes this work.” Another
submission states: “Any councillor who supports such a nonsensical notion
should be wary for their jobs come next election.”
This is what the ratepayers, what the LORD MAYOR is saying the mums and
dads think of his law. “Council continues to promote inner-city high density
living. A big part of having that work is to allow people to spontaneously go to
their local park.” “We should not have to pay for using a public park. Being a
long-term resident of Bracken Ridge and Brighton, I wish to lodge my strong
objections to the Brisbane City Council's consideration of charging people who
wish to use public facilities in a group of 50 or more.” They tinkered around and
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
- 25 use tricky language when it comes to the guidelines, but let me be clear: this law
will capture unsuspecting ratepayers who use our parks.
“The proposed regulation seems unnecessary and a further incursion into our
civil liberties.” “Firstly, to be blunt, I'm angered by this proposal. This is
Australia and not a police state. For the public to not be able to use a public
asset without first obtaining permission from the public servants whom the
public employs is simply a travesty.” “I think the new laws are ridiculous. I
request that BCC (Brisbane City Council) does not impose any fees on
community groups to access and use our parks.'
An area coordinator of a Neighbourhood Watch says, “I have reviewed the
proposed legislation restricting the use of public spaces and enforcing fines for
any misuse of these areas. I strongly believe the funding used to write and
enforce this legislation could be better used to simply create more public spaces
rather than trying to restrict use in the areas we already have. If the proposed
legislation, if at the most basic level, is a place to generate more money for the
City Council, then this is a cowardly way of doing it.”
The other issue I have is the actual powers, the voice direction, so that people
from non-English speaking backgrounds, who are unaware of this law, will be
hit with over a $5,000 fine. This is not the Brisbane way. This is not an
appropriate way to manage our open spaces. The fact that, despite
overwhelming evidence, despite the concerns of ratepayers, this arrogant, out of
touch LNP Council have proceeded with this is a blight on our city. I won't
stand for it; the ratepayers that I've spoken to as I move around the city are
horrified by this proposal. It is not the right way to manage our open spaces, and
the LORD MAYOR—I wish he'd withdrawn this item rather than item A,
because we are all going to have to live with the consequences of this law.
It's not good enough. I today stand on behalf of the thousands of ratepayers who
have voiced their concerns, the over 100 submissions that have utterly—
Councillor interjecting.
Councillor DICK:
Have you read any of the commentary about this, Councillor MURPHY?
Councillor interjecting.
Councillor DICK:
Well, I said the thousands—
Chairman:
Order!
Councillor DICK:
Have you read any of the feedback on this?
Chairman:
Order! Don't be distracted, Councillor DICK.
Councillor DICK:
Well, Madam Chair, you see the LNP councillors laughing about this.
Councillor Ryan MURPHY, the Councillor for Doboy, thinks it's acceptable for
kindergartens or schools or Bushcare groups or Neighbourhood Watch groups
being caught up in red tape and being charged thousands of dollars in fines if
they don't comply with the new LNP regulations.
Chairman:
Councillor DICK, your time has expired.
Councillor DICK:
Well, I don't, Madam Chair, and I will not support it today.
Chairman:
LORD MAYOR, you claimed misrepresentation.
LORD MAYOR:
Madam Chairman, I just noted that Councillor DICK claimed that I had said that
nothing is going to change. I did not say that. I said that nothing will change for
most Brisbane people out there that are simply going about their business of
having a normal barbeque or whatever it might be in terms of park usage. I said
there were changes in relation to larger events that required the involvement of
people.
Chairman:
Thank you. Further debate; Councillor KING.
Councillor KING:
Thank you, Madam Chair, I rise to speak in support of this motion. As we all
know, Brisbane is a growing city with increasing demands on our open spaces
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
- 26 and malls. This is why Council considered a range of measures that will help
activate our city and ensure open spaces remain accessible and safe to all users.
Brisbane has an extensive and expanding work of parks across our city of about
2,000 parks across our city. Council cares and maintains these valued assets for
residents and visitors to share in a friendly, safe environment. PLACA is about
amalgamating 11 different local laws across Brisbane public spaces into one.
Very simple. It is combining these laws into one.
I believe PLACA will provide fair and equitable access to Council parks for a
wide range of purposes. In doing so, Council will seek to reduce the impacts on
our park users, neighbouring properties, vegetation and park infrastructure from
any activities, events, within Council parks.
The LORD MAYOR was quite correct; the majority of park users will not
experience anything new to how they currently use our parks. In true Labor
style, the Opposition Leader, Councillor DICK, wants to go out there and
scaremonger the residents of Brisbane. He wants to scaremonger residents of
Brisbane and lie and deceive them for what PLACA is actually about.
Councillor DICK:
Point of order, Madam Chair.
Chairman:
Yes, point of order against you, Councillor KING. Yes, Councillor DICK.
Councillor DICK:
I find that offensive that the councillor is accusing me of lying, and I ask her to
withdraw that.
Chairman:
Councillor KING, yes, can you—
Councillor KING:
I'll withdraw the word lie, Madam Chairman, and I will replace it with
deliberately deceiving the residents of Brisbane.
In fact, birthday parties are going to be—according to Councillor DICK—are
going to be cancelled across our city and our public spaces. Madam Chair,
really? I don't think Councillor DICK has actually read the documentation at all.
Because, in fact, birthday parties, barbeques, gatherings of more than 50 people
in our parks are as of right activity and will not require a permit. So that means
the Neighbourhood Watch that I had a barbeque in the park last weekend can
still go on. I would suggest that Councillor DICK and those opposite actually
read the documentation in front of them and stop deliberately misleading the
people of Brisbane.
Residents can also still use Council parks—
Councillors interjecting.
Chairman:
Order!
Councillor KING:
—free of charge—
Chairman:
Order!
Councillor KING:
—which has always been the case. It always has been the case. What these
changes do is, as the LORD MAYOR said, if you want an exclusive part of one
of our Brisbane City Council parks to your own exclusive use, you would have
to apply for a permit. If a commercial operator—which has always been the
case—wants to hold an event in our Council parks, shock horror, they would
have to actually get a permit.
This PLACA is designed to protect our parks. If there is a large birthday party,
which is more than welcome to use our public spaces, but if they want horses,
for instance, in a park, or a shelter more than 15 square metres in our park, or
maybe a large jumping castle in our park, then they would have to apply for a
permit. That permit is free. You will be required to pay a refundable bond if you
want that activity in our park, to safeguard our parks, in case there was any
damage. But that is a refundable deposit, that you put in a bond.
Councillor interjecting.
Councillor KING:
Yes, so they don't ruin our parkland. Our parks are for the enjoyment of every
single resident of Brisbane. Park users will be able to apply on line or via
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
- 27 Council Contact Centre for permits, or via Council's Business Hotline for
commercial permits.
I plead with the Leader of the Opposition to tell the truth about PLACA and not
deceive the residents of Brisbane. Thank you.
Chairman:
Further debate; Councillor JOHNSTON.
Councillor JOHNSTON:
Yes, Madam Chairman, I rise to speak on item B, the Public Land and Council
Assets Local Law 2014. I think that we are in some Melbourne Cup induced
utopia today, with the LORD MAYOR saying that nothing is really changing
under this new by-law, and other LNP Councillors suggesting it has always been
the case that these things are regulated.
If the LORD MAYOR actually believes what he is saying, and other LNP
councillors believe what they are saying, why are they bringing through a
regressive, restrictive new by-law that infringes on the rights of Brisbane
residents to enjoy public spaces? That is what this by-law is all about.
One of the issues with the matter before us today is that the Council papers
actually refer to the submissions and a summary of submissions which,
apparently, have been tabled. Now, they have not been tabled in this Chamber.
You have to go up to the CEO's office; you have to get a copy of them, and you
actually have to go through them, which I have done. It is of great concern when
139 residents in this city make submissions, and 134 of them are opposed,
strongly opposed, to the issues that have been put forward for this new by-law.
If there is ever an example of this LNP Administration not listening, using its
powers and its majority to bring in local by-laws that are not supported by
residents, this is an example of it. For them to stand here today and try and
placate people and say, well, there's no real changes; you'll just still do what you
were doing before—that is simply not true. It seems to me the people who have
failed to understand the by-law are the ones who pushed it through Civic
Cabinet, who pushed it through the party room and are trying to push it through
this Chamber today.
I am extremely concerned about the impact of what is proposed. I made I don't
know how many pages—a four-page submission—and I note that these are
some of the events that could be affected by the new permit system: Anzac Day,
Remembrance Day—but we know the LNP don't want you attending at
Remembrance Day, other commemorative services held by the RSL,
Neighbourhood Watch barbeques, school-related events like cross-country, their
environmental classes that they take on the banks of Oxley Creek, which all of
my public schools do, Active School Travel, where they start walking in the
park, and we have hundreds of kids walking from park to park and then on to a
school, class break-ups, orienteering, Bushcare groups, tree planting groups,
informal not-for-profit groups like Paws, our refugee basketball program in
Yeronga Memorial Park. Up to 100 kids meet in the park up there. They don't
have any money. The only money they get is what I give them out of the SIF
(Suburban Initiative Fund), and I can tell you now, I won't be giving them $300
each Wednesday when they make a booking in the park. It is not acceptable that
the Administration has failed to listen to the feedback of Councillors and
residents and adjusted this local by-law.
Other issues—the Gecko’s native animal display; indigenous gatherings such as
Sorry Day. We have up to 100 people at Sorry Day in the Sherwood Arboretum.
Now they're going to have to go out and pay for a permit, pay for a booking, and
this Council isn’t trying to revenue raise. Gold activities, tai-chi in the park,
Council bands in the park, and the list goes on and on and on.
If the LORD MAYOR is going to stand up and tell me these people don't need a
booking and a permit, then please explain to me why this by-law says they do.
It's as simple as that. The by-law requires them to do it. Your verbal
reassurances that that is not the case are in stark contrast to the legislation that
you are asking us to approve today. It is of huge concern to me and huge
concern to the residents in my area.
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
- 28 I just want to read you a couple of those comments from residents of Brisbane:
“Any councillor who supports such a nonsensical notion should be wary for
their jobs come next election. The landowners of Brisbane already pay for open
space in their rates. This seems unfair and is double-dipping in my opinion.”
Here's another one: “Are you serious about charging groups to use public parks?
That is a big issue, and frankly that enrages me if it's true.” This is not me—I'm
always enraged by what this LNP Administration is doing—these are the
residents of Brisbane, and let me tell you, based on the suburbs they're from, it's
from all over the city.
“I strongly object to this insane proposal to take away free use of public areas.
This is a joke, and the kind of thing that makes me want to pack up and leave.”
Well, LORD MAYOR, it's not the G20 that's getting people to leave this city;
it's your parks by-law. Here's another one, “No soccer with the neighbours and
the children, bowls at a birthday party. In my younger days, I spent many
wonderful afternoons in the park playing soccer with local mates. We never
caused any complaints.” “I am deeply concerned that citizens have to pay for
having a party in the park. I attended a first birthday of a friend's baby yesterday.
They live in a small apartment. They are struggling financially. Having their
party in the park was a perfect solution for them. Had they been forced to pay, it
would not go ahead.”
“In a truly civil and civilised society, parks play a unique role in bringing people
together across all boundaries. They are especially important for low income
families wanting places of recreation for their children. These laws are Big
Brother intrusion.” It goes on and on and on, and I am looking for my Sherwood
resident who I have in my hand here, because it was the best letter of all of
them, and I would like to find Mr Hefner's. But let me continue while I look for
his.
We have another one that says, “This should not apply to friends, kids' parties,
barbeques, sporting club parties and so on.” There is a consistent piece of
feedback through all of these, that the residents want not-for-profit users
excluded from this legislation. That is what this Administration should be doing.
That is what they have failed to do.
The concern here is, of course, that they are trying to tell us that there are no
changes, there are no real impacts, and that is simply not true. So let me say this,
from a Sherwood resident, “Firstly, to be blunt, I am angered by this proposal.
This is Australia and not a police state. For the public to be able to use a public
asset without first obtaining permission from public servants whom the public
employs is simply a travesty. Council appears to forget it does not own our city,
and it does not know best. The citizens own it. We know best, and the Council is
put in place by the citizens to work for the citizens, not against them. Why has
the Council not released all the plans for the Oxley Road corridor?” Well, good
one, thanks Phil.
“Why does the Council approve developments that cause harm and hardship? I
can only see Council being taken to court by innocent people defending
themselves from unjust fines. The Council needs to remember they are there to
serve the public. It is not a police service. It does not know the best thing for the
majority of citizens. I do not support the introduction of the permit system as it
will adversely impact on the inclusive nature of public open spaces.”
It goes on for another whole page. That is one resident out my way. If that does
not say to you, LORD MAYOR, through you, Madam Chairman, and the LNP
councillors, you have so missed the mark on this, so far off. Mr Hefner is not
alone in this. Here is another one, a volunteer group in my area. “What's the
purpose or rationale for the introduction of the law? Is it just to raise money? As
far as I can see, it will simply create unnecessary red tape and complexity for
both Council officers and the community. It is, in essence, commercialising the
use of Council parks which I vigorously oppose.”
If this Administration truly wanted to refine the rules around parks, perhaps
there is some merit in that. But instead, they have brought out the fist of
incompetence and they have slammed it down on our public spaces and now we
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
- 29 are all going to suffer because this LNP Administration will not listen to
community feedback. A total of 134 people out of 139 have told you this by-law
does not reflect their views, does not reflect the way they use their parks, does
not reflect the values that they vote for as citizens of this Council. To continue
and to push this by-law through in the face of such strong and genuine concern
is just appalling—appalling.
I will not be supporting this by-law before us today. I urge the LORD MAYOR
to withdraw this item. This item has a fundamental mistake in it. It is not a bylaw that respects the values of our city. It is not a by-law that respects the wishes
of our community, and it is not a by-law that this community supports. Pull it,
LORD MAYOR.
Chairman:
Councillor JOHNSTON—
Councillor JOHNSTON:
Go back to the drawing board.
Chairman:
—your time has expired, thank you. Further debate; Councillor MURPHY.
Councillor MURPHY:
Thanks very much, Madam Chairman; I rise to also contribute to the debate on
item B in the report of the Public Land and Council Assets Local Law. This
local law is a very important step forward for our city. There is, as Councillor
KING has said, an ever-increasing demand that we have on our parks and open
spaces throughout our city. We have a limited footprint of parks and we have an
ever-increasing population year on year. So it is up to us as councillors in this
place to ensure that those assets are used as fairly and as equitably as possible.
Make no mistake: PLACA is not ground-breaking. It is a machinery of
government change. At its heart, it brings 11 local laws into one—one
consolidated local law to govern the use of parks in this city rather than 11
which no doubt makes the job of administering this law simple for our officers
and much easier for residents to understand.
Importantly, it codifies the requirement of Council consent for commercial
activities in parks, events which feature commercial elements, which is very
important, and it spells out those requirements in black and white, in easy to
understand language for the average resident.
But let's not forget much of this already occurs under existing local laws. The
requirement for Council consent extends to the following activities. I want to
spell them out for all in the Chamber, because it appears that there is some
confusion about what they do and don't apply to. Exclusive use of a designated
site for a set period of time—exclusive use. The only people allowed on the site.
Erecting, placing or maintaining any structure or fixture, except for a portable
shade tent or shelter covering less than 15 square metres.
Access and use to a Council power source. Not many children's birthdays I
know that need a Council power source in a park. Commercial activity—
exchange of goods or services for livelihood or profit—for profit, the key word
there. The sale of food and drinks; the sale of alcohol; involving animals, other
than domestic pets, so things like goats, deer, maybe an animal petting zoo—I
think that is fairly clear to understand—or it affects or involves native
vegetation or wildlife, driving or parking a vehicle in Council parkland. So those
are the requirements under PLACA.
As councillors who have many events that are covered under those guidelines, in
our local parks, we must acknowledge that there are risks associated with all
those activities. The sale of alcohol brings the risk of drunken and violent
behaviour if an event isn’t managed correctly—something that Council does
need to know about. The use of Council power sources brings the risk of
damage—
Councillor interjecting.
Chairman:
Councillor JOHNSTON! Stop interjecting. You've had your say.
Councillor MURPHY:
The use of Council power boards and outlets brings a risk of damage to our
infrastructure. Vehicles in Council parks not only brings the public liability risk,
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
- 30 but if it isn’t managed correctly, vehicles can damage Council's underground
and above-ground infrastructure, rip up the grass, and destroy plants.
Animal farms bring the risk of weed transmission into the ground, and there is
no need to go on and list through all the extra requirements that these uses bring.
But as currently is the case, these activities do need to be monitored by Council.
They need to be approved, and the risk that they present needs to be managed.
There will be no permits for children's birthday parties. We know that the Labor
Party have been very keen to characterise PLACA from the very start as the
death knell of children's birthday parties in Brisbane, but that is not the case.
Unless there are some very, very lucky children out here whose parents are
planning a birthday party that includes a jumping castle, an animal farm or a
fireworks display, they will not require a permit under this scheme.
Councillors interjecting.
Councillor MURPHY:
Okay, all right, I accept the interjections. Let's say
Chairman:
Order! Councillor ABRAHAMS!
Councillor MURPHY:
—you are a very lucky child; let's say you are a very lucky child and your
parents do want to undertake these activities in a Council park. If a permit is
approved and the activity is non-commercial, then you will have to pay a 100
per cent refundable bond. If the activity concludes and there's no damage to the
Council park, then everyone parts their merry ways, the permit is filed,
approved, and the money returns to the people that applied for it. How is that a
profit-making motive on behalf of Council? Not at all. Not at all, Madam
Chairman.
The only controversial aspect to PLACA is the disgraceful fear campaign that
the Australian Labor Party have run around it. Those opposite have done
everything possible within their power to make the mums and dads of Brisbane
think that Council officers will be breathing down their neck every time they use
a Council park. We know that nothing could be further from the truth.
They are happy to build a scare campaign, so far, but we know they have not
offered any alternative vision for how they would manage parks in the city of
Brisbane.
Councillors interjecting.
Chairman:
Order!
Councillor MURPHY:
They've not offered any alternative vision.
Chairman:
Order!
Councillor MURPHY:
Maybe it is a free-for-all.
Chairman:
Councillor DICK!
Councillor MURPHY:
No, I am wrong—I apologise, Madam Chairman; I may have just misled the
Chamber. They did offer an alternative vision for parks for the city of Brisbane
at the last election. Remember what it was? It was public sunscreen dispensers,
Sunday fun days, Bollywood festivals—and what happened to that vision,
Madam Chairman? It was roundly rejected by the people of Brisbane at that
election. So I have no faith that they had any alternative that can be believed
here.
If Councillor DICK was in touch with his community, he would realise that the
grab bag of activities that he'd just listed off before that would be applicable
under this law should already be permissible under Council's existing laws, or
require a permit under Council's existing laws. So either the groups are not
required to lodge a permit, or they currently do need to lodge a permit under the
existing scheme. PLACA should be a wake-up call to them.
We on this side fundamentally don't accept that ratepayers across the city should
subsidise the damage that those people who are doing the wrong thing do to the
infrastructure in our parks. It would be very easy for us to come in here and say,
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
- 31 dirt bikes, go for your life; mountain climbing, no worries; archery, not a
problem; fireworks, go for your life, go on, get out there and go for your life.
Madam Chairman, the Labor Party would love us to say, please go about your
business in our Council parks, and at the end of the day, if you damage
something, don’t worry, Brisbane's ratepayers are standing by ready to assist
you to pay for that damage. Thing about the TAG (Taskforce Against Graffiti)
campaign; think about the TAG campaign which highlights the damage that
graffiti does to Council assets—
Councillors interjecting.
Chairman:
Order!
Councillor MURPHY:
—but then has to be cleaned up, and the money that is used to clean up those
assets comes out of Council's funds that we use to build parks, to build other
assets that people love.
Those opposite are always at our throats to put more money into parks in their
area, more money into footpaths in their area. Well, Madam Chairman, the same
goes for damage to our parks. Every piece of Council infrastructure in a park
that is damaged needs to be paid for out of the back pocket of every ratepayer in
this city. PLACA is about saying no. If you do cause damage to infrastructure
within Council parks, you will be made to pay for that damage. No more, and no
less, Madam Chairman. This is a very good law. It is an appropriate law. It is an
appropriate reform, and I urge all councillors on both sides of the Chamber to
support it.
ADJOURNMENT:
226/2014-15
At that time, 4.27pm, it was resolved on the motion of Councillor Ryan MURPHY, seconded by Councillor
Kim MARX, that the meeting adjourn for a period of 15 minutes, to commence only when all councillors had
vacated the Chamber and the doors locked.
Council stood adjourned at 4.28pm.
UPON RESUMPTION:
Chairman:
Further debate on item B of the E&C report, Councillor BOURKE.
Councillor BOURKE:
Okay, Madam Chairman, if the Australian Labor Party don’t want to keep
talking on item B I’m more than happy—Councillor MURPHY was the last—
Chairman:
No.
Councillor BOURKE:
—speaker Councillor DICK so wrong again. I'll point out a few other times that
you've been wrong here this afternoon, thank for you for the interjection
Councillor DICK.
Chairman:
Order.
Councillor BOURKE:
So item B, Madam Chairman, the Public Land and Council Assets Local Law
2014 which is before us again today. As other speakers have said, this particular
item combines or amalgamates or abolishes 11 different local laws that used to
be in existence in this place. Why are we doing it, Madam Chairman, because
those 11 local laws between them some have been in place for 25-odd years,
Madam Chairman. They do not reflect the way that our parks, open spaces,
malls and other assets are being used across this city.
So if we run through them quickly, Madam Chairman, just for the interest of the
Council Chamber, because while a lot of the debate is focused on parks there are
other aspects to this local law. So the Chinatown and Brunswick Street Mall
Local Law; the Foreshore and Retaining Walls Local Law; the Parks Local Law,
Madam Chairman, which was implemented in the 1980s.
The Public Health Safety and Convenience Local Law, Madam Chairman; the
Ferries, Jetties and Pontoons Local Law; the Health Safety and Amenity Local
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
- 32 Law; the Legal Proceedings Local Law; Parking and Control of Traffic Area
Local Law; Queen Street Mall Local Law; the Streets, Bridges, Culverts and et
cetera Local Law and the Sundry Matters relating to Structures Local Law,
Madam Chairman, are all the local laws that are either removed, amalgamated
or in some way changed by the document that we have before us today.
What does it mean, Madam Chairman? The changes we have before us today,
Madam Chairman, mean that the bulk of the people using our parks and open
spaces will see no change as the LORD MAYOR said. The people of Brisbane
will still be able to go into our parks and open spaces and use them as they
always have, Madam Chairman. They will be able to enjoy them and they will
be able to use the amenities and the infrastructure that's been provided, Madam
Chairman, by Council for their enjoyment.
What changes there are, Madam Chairman, are around processes in place to
protect and preserve some of those uses so that they don't impact on other park
users, Madam Chairman. Some of the uses that didn't exist 80 years ago, Madam
Chairman, or weren't as prevalent 80 years ago—or sorry 20 years ago—in the
1980s, when the original Parks Local Law was written, Madam Chairman. So
we have updated and changed this local law to reflect the growing usage of our
parks, and to make it clearer and easier for people to understand how and where
they can conduct some activities, while not preventing people from enjoying our
parks and open spaces.
Madam Chairman, to touch on some of the points that have been raised.
Councillor DICK got up with great bluff and bluster at the start about great
errors and problems that he might have had or understood he had in this
document, Madam Chairman. A lot of his comments and a lot of his concerns
that he raised only highlighted the fact that he had not read the document
himself, Madam Chairman, because on the first issue he quoted point 20 of the
E&C report which refers to 129 public submissions. Then he goes, but on the
file there are 139, Madam Chairman. They can't even get that right.
Well if he got to point 23 in the E&C, Madam Chairman, he'd read that there's
10 submissions from the Queensland Government Department. Ten plus 129
equals 139. So when the LORD MAYOR said there's 129 public submissions,
he was right, Madam Chairman. Councillor DICK obviously didn't get that far
through the E&C report.
Chairman:
Councillor JOHNSTON.
Councillor BOURKE:
Madam Chairman—
Chairman:
Stop yelling out in this Chamber.
Councillor BOURKE:
Opposition councillors claimed—
Chairman:
Order.
Councillor BOURKE:
I know it's been a joke to them, Madam Chairman, because it's a joke all the way
through with the scare campaign that they ran misleading the people of
Brisbane, Madam Chairman, because that's all they did. They obviously haven't
read this document. It was all a scare campaign and a joke to the Australian
Labor Party to score cheap political points, Madam Chairman. So councillors
opposite claimed that the submissions had not been tabled. Well if they bothered
to walk the 25 metres over to the table in the corner of the room with the files
relating to this particular E&C, Madam Chairman, all of the submissions are
tabled in this Council Chamber for councillors to see, Madam Chairman.
There they are, for everyone to see, contrary to the claims by the Australian
Labor Party. Councillors—
Chairman:
Councillor BOURKE just a moment.
Warning – Councillor Nicole JOHNSTON
The Chairman then formally warned Councillor JOHNSTON that unless she desisted from interjecting and
interrupting the process of the meeting she would be suspended from the service of the Council for a period of
up to eight days. Furthermore, Councillor JOHNSTON was warned that, if she were suspended from the
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
- 33 service of the Council, she would be excluded from the Council Chamber, ante-Chamber, public gallery and
other meeting places for the period of suspension.
Chairman:
Councillor BOURKE.
Councillor BOURKE:
Thanks very much, Madam Chairman. Councillor DICK harped on about the
submission from the Department of Justice, Madam Chairman, how Council
hadn't listened, we hadn't done anything, Madam Chairman. He couldn't find—
well, Madam Chairman, he obviously didn't read the original PLACA and the
PLACA that we see before us today because otherwise in section 62(1) and
section 62(a) he would notice the additional six words that have been inserted
into each clause that address the concerns from the Department of Justice,
Madam Chairman.
We know Councillor DICK doesn't like detail, Madam Chairman and instead
prefers to run scare campaigns out there in the public, Madam Chairman, which
is why I turn to the examples that he put forward, Madam Chairman. So he
talked about how Easter-egg hunts and kindy functions in parks wouldn't be able
to happen under this Local Law, Madam Chairman. Madam Chairman,
obviously he didn't get to the last page of today's E&C.
Councillor DICK:
Point of order, Madam Chair.
Chairman:
Just a moment. Point of order against you Councillor BOURKE. Yes Councillor
DICK?
Councillor DICK:
I completely reject that. I claim to be misrepresented.
Chairman:
I thought I heard you say it but okay.
Councillor interjecting.
Chairman:
Anyway. Order.
Councillors interjecting.
Chairman:
Order.
Councillor BOURKE:
Obviously I've hit a raw nerve, Madam Chairman. Obviously I've hit a raw
nerve. So, Madam Chairman, he didn't get to the community guidelines use of
Council parks document which is attached to the E&C for everyone's—
Chairman:
Councillor JOHNSTON.
Councillor BOURKE:
—use today, Madam Chairman, where it clearly outlines picnicking or
barbequing including bring your own barbeques, private gatherings and
celebrations, playing in playgrounds and nature play areas, ball skills and
games, running, wading, paddling where signed, orienteering, rogaining,
geocaching, lists out a whole pile of activities which are as-of-right activities,
Madam Chairman, that do not require a parks-use permit. Madam Chairman, it's
in the first five words in that first column. These following activities do not
require a parks-use permit.
Now, Madam Chairman, either they did not get that far in the document because
they're lazy or, Madam Chairman, they are playing a political game running a
scare campaign with the mothers and fathers of this city, Madam Chairman,
whether or not they can actually have birthday parties for their kids, Madam
Chairman, or it's both, Councillor KNAPP. I take your interjection. But, Madam
Chairman, Councillor DICK went onto say, what about Bushcare groups?
Madam Chairman, our Habitat Brisbane groups are organised by Council. They
work in designated areas. They're supported by Council, Madam Chairman.
Talk about clutching at straws, Madam Chairman. We had then other speakers
raising issues around Anzac Day and Neighbourhood Watches and crosscountry and environmental classes. Madam Chairman, I would just go back to
picnicking or barbecuing, private gatherings or celebrations, playing,
playground, nature playing to all these as of right activities, Madam Chairman,
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
- 34 which the Australian Labor Party and those opposite raised as going to need a
permit, but they didn't get past that first bit which says the following activities
do not require a parks use permit, Madam Chairman.
It's even got a for example down the bottom, Councillor DICK through you,
Madam Chairman, just to help him out. For example holding a children's
birthday party or family gathering in a park will not require a parks use permit.
Madam Chairman, I don't know how much more clear it can be. I don't know
how much more clear can it be for those opposite.
Councillor SUTTON:
Point of order, Madam Chair.
Chairman:
Point of order against you Councillor BOURKE. Yes Councillor SUTTON?
Councillor SUTTON:
Will Councillor BOURKE take a question about jumping castles and kids'
birthday parties?
Chairman:
Just a moment. Councillor BOURKE will you take a question from Councillor
SUTTON?
Councillor BOURKE:
Councillor SUTTON has her chance to speak, Madam Chairman, sorry I'm
going to keep going. Madam Chairman, we then have the submissions that have
been made by those opposite. Madam Chairman, I'm glad that Councillor
SUTTON is back for this because we all remember Councillor SUTTON as the
great crusader against wi-fi in our Council parks, Madam Chairman, that
scourge that was going to destroy our Council parks.
Well, Madam Chairman, it might shock you and the rest of the Chamber to learn
that there is a number of councillors on Councillor SUTTON's side that is now
communicating, wanting more wi-fi. I don't know whether they're sending the
emails from parks that have wi-fi in them, Madam Chairman, but those opposite,
having spoken out against it and saying it was going to destroy our parks and
destroy our communities, Madam Chairman, now want more wi-fi.
Councillor NEWTON:
Point of order, Madam Chair.
Chairman:
Point of order Councillor BOURKE, just a moment. Yes Councillor NEWTON?
Councillor NEWTON:
I appreciate Councillor BOURKE doesn't want to debate his local law. I fail to
see what the wi-fi in parks issue has to do with the amendments to the local law
today, Madam Chair. I'd ask that you draw him back to the item at hand which is
a PLACA.
Chairman:
Thank you Councillor NEWTON. Councillor BOURKE?
Councillor BOURKE:
Thanks very much, Madam Chairman, it's a great example of how the Australian
Labor Party talk about how one thing in our parks might destroy them but
obviously they get it so wrong that they then embrace it and want more of it,
Madam Chairman. I turn to Councillor SUTTON's other submission around
commercialisation of our parks. We all know that Councillor ABRAHAMS
loves turning our parks into car parks to support spray painters. It would shock
probably Councillor ABRAHAMS to know that Councillor CUMMING has
written to me on a couple of occasions seeking additional commercial uses in
some of the foreshore parks, Madam Chairman, completely against the
submissions put in by Councillor DICK, Councillor SUTTON and others,
Madam Chairman.
Councillors interjecting.
Chairman:
Order.
Councillor BOURKE:
Madam Chairman—
Chairman:
Order.
Councillor BOURKE:
Madam Chairman, they can't even get a consistent position, they can't—
Councillor interjecting.
Chairman:
Councillor ABRAHAMS.
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
- 35 Councillor BOURKE:
They can't even get a consistent position on that side of the Chamber, Madam
Chairman, but they can go out into our communities, run a political
scaremongering campaign with the mums and dads of this city, Madam
Chairman, on the back of no facts, having not read the documents, having not
understood what PLACA is actually doing, Madam Chairman. That is an
absolute shame for democracy in this city, Madam Chairman, that those
opposite have chosen to take the low road when it could not have been any
clearer in the documentation that was put out, Madam Chairman.
I'm happy to read it again, Madam Chairman, happy to read it again into the
record around the fact that birthday parties and all of those activities that are
listed as as-of-right activities, do not require permits. Madam Chairman, this
document will provide the clarity for this city to go forward in managing and
protecting our parks and open spaces in the years to come. Madam Chairman, it
will provide clarity to commercial people who wish to run some activities in our
parks, it will provide—
Chairman:
Councillor BOURKE your time has expired, thank you. Councillor DICK you
claim misrepresentation.
Councillor DICK:
Yes, I certainly do, Madam Chair. Councillor BOURKE said that I had claimed
that kindy or childcare functions would not occur in parks. I said nothing of the
sort. I said that those hardworking groups would be severely disadvantaged and
impacted by this unfair LNP Law.
Chairman:
Thank you. Councillor FLESSER.
Councillor FLESSER:
Thank you, Madam Chair. Madam Chair, if anything should have been
withdrawn from this Council Chamber today it should be this proposed Local
Law, Madam Chair. Councillor BOURKE should hang his head in shame for
bringing such a poorly drafted Local Law to this Council Chamber and then try
to defend it. Madam Chair, I thought the LNP was all about reducing red tape.
Madam Chair, there's enough red tape in this local law to stretch between here
and Moscow, Madam Chair.
`
Talking about Moscow, Madam Chair, I read Letters to the Editor in the
Courier-Mail, Madam Chair. There's a bit of a theme has come about in the last
couple of days as a result of this proposed local law. I'll just read a little bit of
one of those letters. It says: “our Council behaves like some crumby old eastern
European communist state with regard to fining ratepayers.” Well, Madam
Chair, I agree with that. That's what's happening, Madam Chair. That's what the
writers of the Courier-Mail are saying about this Council Chamber being led by
Councillor BOURKE and this PLACA law that he's brought here again today.
Now, Madam Chair, nothing could be further from the truth that this law is
simple for officers and simple for residents, Madam Chair, nothing could be
further from the truth. The reason I say that, Madam Chair, is because I asked
Councillor BOURKE a direct question two weeks ago in the committee about
some of the aspects of this local law. In the end, Madam Chair, he said well,
Council officers will have some discretion. Well, Madam Chair, that sums it all
up. It sums it up.
`
You bring a local law in here with all these things that you have to do and things
that you can't do, where there are fines, large fines applicable to residents not
complying with the local law. Then you say something like well the officers will
have some discretion. Well that's not good enough, Madam Chair. Brisbane's
residents don't want a local law where Council officers are going to have some
discretion when it involves fines of up to thousands and thousands of dollars.
Madam Chair, that's not good enough.
Madam Chair, if we look at the local law and we compare what it actually says
in the local law to the community guidelines; the new community guidelines
that Councillor BOURKE has produced, Madam Chair, there's something
seriously wrong. Madam Chair, the local law does not refer in any way to
groups of people. It does not define what a group of people is like. In the
information sheet that's going to be I assume distributed to Brisbane's residents
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
- 36 and put on the website, that says a large group is defined as more than 20 people
in an actual area reserve or bushland or 50 people in all other parks.
So, Madam Chair, that's quite specific, you would think that would be in the
local law. But is it? Is it, Madam Chair? When the Council officer goes out and
sees a group of 20 people or 50 people, maybe my Rohingya community playing
volleyball in the Banyo Memorial Park, there's 50 people there. Madam Chair,
will the Council officers be able to point in the local law where it says sorry,
there's 50 people in this park. You should have got a permit, I'm going to fine
you. Who are they going to fine would be a very good question as well.
So, Madam Chair, there's something fundamentally wrong when the information
we're giving to residents is not the same as what it actually says in the proposed
local law. Madam Chair, that's not fair. It's certainly not fair on Council officers
and it's not fair on the ratepayers of Brisbane. So, Madam Chair, there are still
lots of questions that have not been answered. This local law has been very
poorly drafted. Madam Chair, Councillor BOURKE keeps saying no, it won't
apply to kids' birthday parties or events like that in the park. Madam Chair,
section 9, paragraph f is very clear. This is in relation to who needs a permit.
It says that you'll need a permit for any activities involving significant numbers
of participants and it goes on with more clarifications. Madam Chair, what is
significant numbers of participants? What is it? Madam Chair, there is no
reference to what those numbers are. Councillor BOURKE is saying well it's 20
people in a natural area, 50 people in other parks. So, Madam Chair, where is
that actually in the local law that Councillor BOURKE is bringing here. So,
Madam Chair, it is not clear. This is going to be an absolute nightmare for
Council officers to go out there and enforce in our parks, Madam Chair.
The questions that were raised when this first came to this Council Chamber
have still not been answered, such as officers being able to give oral directions
to people in parks. Madam Chair, there are all sorts of—which are going to be
legally enforced according to this local law. Madam Chair, there are all sorts of
questions around that, whether the person understands completely what the
direction was, what appeal rights that person has, Madam Chair. I think that is a
very dangerous precedent for Council to go down the path of making our
Council officers turn into police officers.
Now police officers, Madam Chair, that's different. They swear an oath, Madam
Chair, and they are trained for this sort of work. But for our Council officers to
be given some power to be able to offer legally-binding directions to people
under a local law with the threat of people not complying being fined, Madam
Chair, is just not good enough. So, Madam Chair, this new local law is red tape
in the absolute extreme. As I said it reaches all the way from Brisbane to
Moscow. I think that comrade BOURKE should withdraw it.
Chairman:
Further debate? Councillor KNAPP.
Councillor KNAPP:
I wasn't going to speak, Madam Chair, but I rise to enter this debate. I've sat
here, Madam Chair, and I've listened to the opposition talk the biggest load of
codswallop that I've heard in almost the 18 years I've been in Chamber. Madam
Chair, it is quite clear, Madam Chair, that there are elements of this new local
law that they don't like. The thing I think that is very telling, Madam Chair,
under nine, requirement for Council consent; commercial activities in parks
require Council consent—quite rightly, Madam Chair; activities with
commercial element also require Council consent—example, activities or events
where food, alcohol or other drinks are for sale, Madam Chair, or sports days or
community sports days.
Now, Madam Chair, that is what happens already. If my local school wants to
go down to Dorrington Park and use the sports oval there it first needs to talk to
the Hockey Club because they have a lease on it. Then they need to let us know
that they are holding a sports day. Do we charge them? No. Do we just let them
say as long as they let us know? So—
Councillor Bourke:
Point of order, Madam Chairman.
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
- 37 Chairman:
Point of order. Yes, Councillor?
Councillor Bourke:
Would Councillor KNAPP take a question?
Councillor KNAPP:
I'd love to take a question. Parks are my favourite subject.
Chairman:
Order.
Councillor Bourke:
So Councillor KNAPP, are you saying that the permits are free?
Councillor KNAPP:
I would have thought for a local school permits are free.
Councillors interjecting.
Chairman:
Order.
Councillor KNAPP:
Just let us know that you're having an event there, Madam Chair.
Chairman:
Order.
Councillor KNAPP:
So the next one is A, if you want to go to the electricity, Madam Chair, down at
Walton Bridge, I don't have a park big enough that any of this applies to, to be
perfectly honest, there's not a big enough space like down at Orleigh Park where
you can go and book a shelter for the day. Yes, there are some parks that you
can do that but I do happen to have one measly little power thing down at
Walton Bridge. Now if you want to book that park and use the power, the threephase power there, you have to let us know that you actually do want to use the
power because you've got to come and get a key from the parks officer to be
able to use that power.
So, Madam Chair, I think that where we're getting to on this is that I think that it
says, distributing any handbill notice, literature or similar promotional material.
Now, Madam Chair, you and I know and most of this side of the Chamber, is
that the Labor Party has form in relation to this, serious form. They continually
over the past many years have flouted the local law in respect to holding events
and handing out material in parks, putting their A frames within parks.
Councillors interjecting.
Chairman:
Order.
Councillor KNAPP:
A certain Federal member on the northside of Brisbane has great—
Chairman:
Order, Order.
Councillor KNAPP:
—form in relation to this and they do not like the fact that this law will contain
them being able to distribute their literature in our parks, Madam Chair. Please;
we all know where they're coming from in relation to this.
Chairman:
Order.
Councillor KNAPP:
Madam Chair, this is a very good law. Not much is changing from the existing
law. It just puts structure under our parks. Madam Chair, as you well know, our
open spaces now are becoming enormously precious simply because, Madam
Chair—
Chairman:
Councillor SUTTON. Order.
Councillor KNAPP:
—simply because, Madam Chair, the reality is that more and more people are
treating our parks as their recreation and almost their backyard. Every week,
every week in every park in Brisbane almost somebody is holding a birthday
party, a children's birthday party.
Chairman:
Order.
Councillor KNAPP:
My grandchildren have parties in the park, Madam Chair. If they have 20
children or if they have 50 children what is the impact on that park? Nothing
really and everyone that surrounds a park loves the fact that they can see
children having a terrific time at a birthday party, where you bring your drinks,
you have cakes and you might have a few games. Madam Chair, does that
require a permit? No it does not. Are we being the cold grey hand of socialism
as Jim Wilding used to talk about? Certainly not, Madam Chair.
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
- 38 This is a really good way of determining if you do want to hold a major event in
a park and which would require the sale of alcohol, that will require setting up
tents—and indeed, Madam Chair, Music in the Moonlight night was held at
Dorrington Park. It was held by Mater Dei last Saturday night and it was a
cracker affair, Madam Chair. Did they apply to us to be able to hold that in the
park? Indeed they did. Did they talk to the Hockey Club? Indeed they did. Did
they pay a deposit to the Hockey Club for the use of that field? They most
certainly did. Did they comply in every single way in terms of the noise and the
lights and the ceasing of music at the right time, they did.
Madam Chair, that is what our parks are for. That is what the permit system is
for when 450 people arrive to have a terrific night in a local park big enough to
hold it. I commend this local law, Madam Chair.
Chairman:
Further debate? Councillor SUTTON.
Councillor SUTTON:
Thank you, Madam Chair. I rise to enter the debate on this issue. I'm going to
start by referring to the community guidelines use of Council parks handout that
we got in one of the attachments to this item. Madam Chair, I'm going to read
from it, it says for park-use permits. The following activities require the consent
of Council brackets a permit, dot point three, erecting or placing a temporary
structure covering more than 15-metre square or bringing in equipment such as
generators, portable toilets et cetera.
Jumping castles require generators okay? Jumping castles require generators. So
if you are having a kid's birthday party and you are having a jumping castle and
can I tell you as someone who has attended 27 kids' birthday parties this year,
many of which have been in local parks, many of which who have had
generators attached to jumping castles, do not stand here today and expect me to
believe that children's birthday parties aren't going to be affected by this local
law.
Because Councillor MURPHY, you might get on your feet, I don't know how
many kids' birthday parties you go to a year but you might get on your feet and
say jumping castles at kids' birthday parties is an indulgence. Well can I tell you
it is one of the cheapest activities you can provide in an outdoor space at a kid's
birthday party? So don't stand here today—I'll tell you Councillor KNAPP
through you, Madam Chair, what's codswallop.
This whole line that the LNP are pushing that kids' birthday parties aren't going
to be affected because guess what, generators are needed to run jumping castles
and you need a permit if you are going to have a structure in a park that needs a
generator okay? So can we just put that load of codswallop to one side because
here they are, Madam Chair, the last of the laissez-faire Liberals in this place,
the last of the laissez-faire Liberals because they have never lectured members
of the Australian Labor Party about over-regulation or the nanny state. They
have never said that.
They have never come in and accused the Labor Party of over-regulating. That
is exactly what they are doing, Madam Chair. They are over-regulating. Why are
they doing it? Because Councillor KNAPP indicated right then and there the
motives behind this because she knows, they know that everyone is using our
Council parks because they are a precious commodity, because we keep selling
them off for unit development, like we're doing at East Brisbane but that's
another story. Madam Chair, they know that our public spaces are precious.
With each and every use and with each and every kid's birthday party, they can
hear the ka-ching of the cash registers going over for the cost of permits.
Councillor SIMMONDS is sitting over there with his head down, won't look up.
Madam Chair, I remember a time when resident parking permits were free. Does
everybody remember that? Stand up on that side of the Chamber if you
remember when resident parking permits were free.
Councillor KING:
Point of order, Madam Chair.
Chairman:
Order. Point of order against you Councillor SUTTON. Yes, Councillor KING?
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
- 39 Councillor KING:
Madam Chair, she is way off track. This has got nothing to do with the report. I
ask you to bring her back.
Chairman:
Thank you Councillor KING. Yes, Councillor SUTTON if you could just keep it
down a little bit as well.
Councillor SUTTON:
Madam Chair, I am alluding to a pattern of behaviour and the pattern of
behaviour of this Administration is to commercialise our public space and our
open space and get the biggest bang for our buck. Every so often, Madam Chair,
you come across an issue which clearly defines the fundamental difference
between the Liberal Party and the Labor Party. I can tell you over here, Madam
Chair, we believe to free and fair access of our parks and public spaces. We do
not believe that this Council should over-regulate and charge Brisbane residents
for the privilege of using their local park.
Nor do we believe that we should live in a nanny-state Council where residents
have to report to Brisbane City Council what they intend to do in their local park
days before they do it. We do not believe that Council officers should have the
power to move on residents who are simply trying to enjoy the public space that
they as ratepayers pay to have Council maintain and upgrade for our use. This is
about core basic services. It is about right of access to our local parks. They are
well off the mark.
Councillor BOURKE doesn't even know that people might have to be charged
for these permits. He had to ask Councillor KNAPP. Councillor BOURKE if
you're not across your brief quite frankly you should resign because this is a
dog's breakfast. This is nothing other than—
Chairman:
Order.
Councillor SUTTON:
—a dog's breakfast. I beg your pardon, what did you say? Do you want to say
that on the public record? That's what you call courage of conviction. The
yellow-belly Councillor for Jamboree Ward, Chairperson of Environment, Parks
and Sustainability Committee hasn't got—
Councillor KING:
Point of order, Madam Chair.
Chairman:
Point of order, Councillor SUTTON. Councillor SUTTON. Point of order. Yes,
Councillor KING.
Councillor KING:
Point of order, Madam Chair. This is just a personal attack on the Councillor for
Jamboree. I'd ask her to withdraw it.
Chairman:
Councillor KING I think it's one all. Let's leave it at that and get on with the
debate.
Councillor SUTTON:
Thank you very much, Madam Chair. I go back to the point. This is overregulation. This is one step closer to the commercialisation of our parks and
public spaces that this Administration is clearly flying headlong towards. This
is, if you look at this we should not just be looking at this local law in isolation.
There are other decisions that are being made by this Council Administration in
the policies and strategies that it puts forward into the public domain that is
actively seeking an over-regulation and commercialisation of our parks and
public spaces.
We need to speak out on that and Brisbane residents need to be aware of this
before we are so far down the track that it is impossible to unwind from. We
have this local law today; we had the announcement of unit development in
Mowbray Park last week. This is a pattern of behaviour that this LNP
Administration is forcing on Brisbane residents without a mandate. You never
went to an election saying that you were going to commercialise our parks, you
never went to—
Chairman:
Councillor SUTTON I think you're really drawing a very long bow on some of
this and I think you should get back to the content of this particular item.
Councillor SUTTON:
Well, Madam Chair, you never went to an election telling residents that you
were going to put in place a permit system where they may be potentially
charged for using their local parks, when they want to have a birthday party for
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
- 40 their kids. You don't have a mandate for it, you never went to the election on it
and Brisbane residents need to be very aware of what this Administration's
sinister plans are for our local parks.
Chairman:
Further debate? Councillor WINES.
Councillor WINES:
Thank you, Madam Chairman, I rise in support of PLACA. It's interesting that
we were listening to Councillor SUTTON talk before about free, fair and full
access to our parks. Well I'd like the full Chamber and the people of Brisbane to
know that this Administration, the QUIRK Administration, believes absolutely
in that ideal; free, full and fair access to our parks for all people. Now the
provisions in this document allow for that to occur.
We've heard at length from previous speakers about how the standard uses of
parks will remain unless you choose to say have a circus, run a commercial
circus in a park which, and I've experienced this in my own ward, which can
ruin our public green spaces. That's why we put a bond in place. That's why we
require a permit. When you have lions and tigers and bears and semitrailers and
tractors running round—
Councillors interjecting.
Chairman:
Order. Order.
Councillor WINES:
—carving up our fields. If the Labor Party—
Chairman:
Order.
Councillor WINES:
—if their arguments were to stand they would accept the commercial enterprise
such as circuses which have caused thousands of dollars of damage to our public
spaces. Well they should be able to get away with it for free. They should be
able to ruin our parks for free and bugger the rest of them.
Councillors interjecting.
Chairman:
Order.
Councillor WINES:
When the under-10 cricketers want to come in and play cricket, well I'll tell
them that Councillor SUTTON said the circus could ruin your cricket pitch for
free facing no financial penalty. Well PLACA is about protecting our public
spaces for the under-10 cricketers. It's about protecting it for its birthday parties
and allowing people to come in and use these parks fully and fairly.
I always reflect on when Councillor DICK made his first speech as opposition
leader, essentially he said that he would be a leader of the opposition and seek
limited to no compromise or dealings with the government. Well that's a fair
position for an opposition leader. But I know in his heart of hearts and I know in
the Labor councillors' heart of hearts they love fines and they love permits.
When Councillor FLESSER was saying this is straight out of Moscow, I could
tell it ached in his soul how much he wanted to get up and support the provision
of forms.
I can assure you, Madam Chairman, this is not straight out of Moscow. This is
straight out of Brisbane where we care about making sure that under-10s can
play cricket on a Saturday morning, that families can use that same field in the
afternoon for barbeques, and that the people of Brisbane can have full, free and
fair access to their own parks.
Chairman:
Further debate? Councillor ABRAHAMS.
Councillor ABRAHAMS:
Thank you, Madam Chair. Madam Chair, I'll be very quick. Madam Chair, there
are two things that have not been discussed in terms of this local law and I think
that they should be put on the record.
First, Madam Chair, I wish to go to some of the submissions. The one that came
back to me of a major concern within my community and I believe it is broader
was the issue of this legislation on ethnic community associations. Madam
Chair, the submission I refer to is one by MDA (Multicultural Development
Association) and their submission was on behalf of a number of new migrant
groups, in which they said: “all of the communities on which we consulted
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
- 41 agreed that the proposed changes would severely hamper park use making it
impossible to continue to organise community events in parks. This would
constitute a significant loss, increasing social isolation experienced by
community members and robbing them of the opportunities to interact with the
broader Brisbane community.”
Madam Chair, this community doesn't have areas where they can meet readily.
The parks are where they feel safe. It’s parks that they use to meet as all of us
regularly see.
But, Madam Chair, I'd just like to list some of those communities; the Afghan
Community Association for parties and celebrations; the Eritrean Community
for parties and celebrations; the Ethiopian Community; the Hazara Association
of Australia; the Iranian Society of Queensland; the Somali Bantu Community
and the South Sudanese and Nuba Community.
Madam Chair, they are major communities that believe quite correctly that this
local law is going to put an imposition on them as to whether they need a permit,
be it free or not free, whether they need it, then whether they are going to be
subject for an oral direction to move on in the situation that they don't have a
permit. So, Madam Chair, this is a very insidious, negative affect on the
communities that are most vulnerable and desperately need and a place where
they can meet and network and support each other for free.
So, Madam Chair, that is part of our opposition but there is also a more central
issue that I am concerned about. If you actually look at the legislation, the
Public Land and Council Asset Local Law, it doesn't have any of the detail in it.
It has the head powers only. You have to turn over and go into the guidelines
and that's when you get the detail as to whether if it's 50 people, 2,000 people,
whether it's a generator, whether it's a pop-up, a shelter that's 15 square metres
or possibly a bit bigger than 15 square metres that is the issue. This information
is not in the local law.
Madam Chair, that guideline can be changed at any time. Madam Chair, that
guideline can be changed without the public being aware of it. Madam Chair,
that guideline can be changed by Council officers without it necessarily coming
back to Council. Madam Chair, that is the worst flaw of this act, this local law.
It is something that we should not have because one thing that community needs
is certainty as to what they can use, how long they can use.
Currently at the moment it could be, Councillor KNAPP, to pick up your
suggestion about just using a shade shelter. At the moment one community
could book for free and use a whole shade shelter for the whole day. But without
anyone knowing an officer might decide that's not reasonable because there are
complaints and just change it so that you can only book for two hours at a time
and the community would have no knowledge of that because it is in the
guideline not in the local law. That is an inherent flaw and a real concern for
Labor councillors.
Chairman:
Further debate? LORD MAYOR.
LORD MAYOR:
Yes, thank you very much, Madam Chairman. Well, Madam Chairman, again
we've seen basically throughout this PLACA process the Labor councillors'
prime motivation is one of fear in the community. Madam Chairman, it is
devoid of what the reality will be. When these things come into practice, into
play, Madam Chairman, what people will see is there is nothing to fear within
this new local law. As has been stated this is the combination, the bringing
together of 11 different local laws into a single local law, the Public Land and
Council Assets Local Law.
Madam Chairman, it is a fact and we heard it today. As soon as Councillor
KNAPP mentioned children's parties, the Opposition Leader interjected, yes, get
their money, yes, get their money. See, that's what it's about. It's about the fear
factor not about the facts. Not grabbing their cash at all Councillor DICK.
Chairman:
Order.
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
- 42 LORD MAYOR:
This is the problem here. We have Councillor DICK spreading fear and
misinformation in relation to this local law, Madam Chairman, and it will be
devoid of the actual realities of when this law applies. People—yes I've read the
submissions and can I just say, Madam Chairman, that this, with its application
will be a good law. Madam Chairman, again let's be absolutely—
Chairman:
Councillor DICK.
LORD MAYOR:
—absolutely clear that the holding of children's birthday parties for family
gatherings in a park will not require a park-use permit, will not require a parkuse permit. Now, Madam Chairman, I come now to the interjector to comrade
Councillor FLESSER from Northgate. Now you making reference I think it was
Part 9, it was section (f), activities involving significant numbers of participants
and he stopped there. Well of course it relates to damage to the park adversely
affecting the adjoining landowners or occupiers or effectively excluding other
people from the enjoyment of that park.
So what are you doing? Are you saying you would support people to affect the
enjoyment of that park, to exclude others from the enjoyment of that park, to
cause damage to that park? I was interested also to hear Councillor FLESSER
make reference to the fact that there needs to be absolute certainty. So I must
remember that, Madam Chairman, the next time Councillor FLESSER comes
knocking seeking some flexibility around the laws or the guidelines associated
with—
Councillor FLESSER:
Point of order, Madam Chair.
Chairman:
Point of order LORD MAYOR.
Councillor FLESSER:
I claim to be misrepresented.
Chairman:
Just a minute.
Councillor FLESSER:
I claim to be misrepresented on what the LORD MAYOR was saying that I said.
Chairman:
Thank you. LORD MAYOR. Sorry you've just turned your microphone.
LORD MAYOR:
Thank you, Madam Chairman. I'm not sure what he could have
misrepresentation about because that's what he was saying, that the local laws
officers need to have an absolute stringent set of outcomes. Well, Madam
Chairman, there needs to be common sense and flexibility overlay in relation to
this. There needs to be the capacity for councillors to come with circumstances
and say that this is a good idea, Madam Chairman. That's how these things
function properly in a civilised society like Brisbane.
So, Madam Chairman, this local law is presented. It is recognising that there are
more and more demands on our parks. Madam Chairman, it is a way of making
sure that everybody can engage in the enjoyment of our parks. Equally that
ratepayers and costs associated with damages that may occur from large events
are protected as well, so that they're not forking out simply because of a failure
of a law to take into account what would be an extremely significant event. So,
Madam Chairman, on that basis I'm happy to move that the report be adopted.
Chairman:
Councillor FLESSER you claim misrepresentation?
Councillor FLESSER:
Thank you, Madam Chairman. Madam Chairman, the LORD MAYOR claimed
that I said that participants under that section that he quoted would be required
to get a permit, Madam Chair, without speaking to the caveats to it. Madam
Chair, I'll just read it. Section (f) says—
Chairman:
No, no, no, no. Councillor FLESSER you're saying, you're claiming you didn't
say what the LORD MAYOR—I don't need it read out. That's not the way it
works.
Councillor FLESSER:
Madam Chair, the law is clear when it uses the words or so if there are—
Chairman:
Councillor FLESSER you claim to—Councillor FLESSER you claimed
misrepresentation.
Councillor FLESSER:
I'm explaining it all.
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
- 43 Chairman:
What did the LORD MAYOR say that you claim you didn't say?
Councillor FLESSER:
Madam Chair, the LORD MAYOR is claiming that I said that this law says that
you have to get a permit if there are significant numbers of participants in a
park. Madam Chair—
Chairman:
You're saying you did not say that.
Councillor FLESSER:
No, Madam Chair—
Chairman:
Okay. Well that's where it ends.
Councillor FLESSER:
The law is quite clear.
Chairman:
That's where it ends. Resume your seat. I will put the motion.
Upon being submitted to the Chamber, the motion for the adoption of the report of the Establishment and
Coordination Committee was declared carried on the voices.
Thereupon, Councillors Milton DICK and Helen ABRAHAMS immediately rose and called for a division,
which resulted in the motion being declared carried.
The voting was as follows:
AYES: 18 -
The Right Honourable the LORD MAYOR, Councillor Graham QUIRK,
DEPUTY MAYOR,
Councillor
Adrian SCHRINNER,
and
Councillors
Krista ADAMS,
Matthew BOURKE,
Amanda COOPER,
Margaret de WIT,
Vicki HOWARD, Steven HUANG, Fiona KING, Geraldine KNAPP, Kim MARX,
Peter MATIC,
Ian McKENZIE,
David McLACHLAN,
Ryan MURPHY,
Angela OWEN-TAYLOR, Julian SIMMONDS and Andrew WINES.
NOES: 8 -
The Leader of the OPPOSITION, Councillor Milton DICK, and Councillors
Helen ABRAHAMS, Peter CUMMING, Kim FLESSER, Steve GRIFFITHS,
Victoria NEWTON, Shayne SUTTON and Nicole JOHNSTON.
The report read as follows
ATTENDANCE:
The Right Honourable the Lord Mayor (Councillor Graham Quirk) (Chairman); Deputy Mayor
(Councillor Adrian Schrinner) (Deputy Chairman); and Councillors Krista Adams, Matthew Bourke,
Amanda Cooper, Peter Matic, David McLachlan and Julian Simmonds.
A
HEALTH, SAFETY AND AMENITY AMENDING LOCAL LAW 2014
155/455/468/3
227/2014-15
1.
The Acting Executive Manager, Field Services Group provided the information below.
2.
On 19 August 2014, Council resolved to propose to make the Health Safety and Amenity
Amending Local Law 2014 (the amending local law) to transfer local government waste
collection and management provisions from the Environmental Protection (Waste
Management) Regulation 2000 (the Waste Regulation) to a local law in anticipation of the
repeal of the Waste Regulation by the Queensland Government.
3.
The Waste Regulation was repealed on 9 September 2014, and the local government waste
collection and management provisions were transferred to Chapter 5A of the Environmental
Protection Regulation 2008 temporarily to allow local governments to put alternative
measures in place to deal with local waste management issues.
4.
Chapter 5A is due to expire on 1 September 2016. Before then it will apply to local
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
- 44 -
governments unless and until a local government makes a local law about waste management
for its area.
5.
The provisions in the amending local law will replace Chapter 5A for the Brisbane City
Council area. They address matters such as keeping bins clean, covered and within property
boundaries as well as confirming Council’s power to give directions and notices to property
occupiers about where bins should be placed out for collection.
6.
The amendments replicate the provisions in Chapter 5A and create no new powers. Some
changes have been made where necessary to reflect current industry practices and
terminology.
7.
The proposed amending local law was advertised on Council’s website from 21 August 2014
to 10 September 2014 for public consultation. A notice about the amending local law was also
placed on the Brisbane Square public noticeboard and a hard copy of the amending local law
was available for inspection at the Central Business Centre. No submissions were received.
9.
As required under the City of Brisbane Act 2010, the proposed amending local law was also
sent to the nine State Government agencies which had nominated to be consulted about this
type of local law.
10.
No department identified any matters of State interest in the proposed amending local law.
11.
After consultation with officers from Compliance and Regulatory Services Branch, a number
of minor amendments have also been made to ensure drafting consistency within the law.
12.
As required by the City of Brisbane Act 2010, a consolidated version of the Health, Safety and
Amenity Local Law 2009 which incorporates the amending local law has been prepared for
adoption by Council, and is submitted on file.
13.
The Acting Executive Manager, Field Services
recommendation and the Committee agrees.
14.
RECOMMENDATION
Group provided the
following
THAT COUNCIL RESOLVE IN ACCORDANCE WITH ATTACHMENT A,
hereunder.
Attachment A
Draft Resolution
TO MAKE THE HEALTH, SAFETY AND AMENITY AMENDING LOCAL LAW 2014
THAT IT BE RESOLVED THAT
As
(i)
On 19 August 2014, Council resolved to propose to make the Health, Safety
and Amenity Amending Local Law 2014 (the proposed local law);
(ii)
Public consultation on the proposed local law was undertaken between
21 August 2014 and 10 September 2014 and Queensland Government
agencies were also consulted about the local law;
(iii)
No submissions were received about the proposed local law and no
Queensland Government agency identified any matters of State interest;
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
- 45 -
(iv)
The purpose of the proposed local law has been amended to add a statement
required by the Environmental Protection Regulation 2008;
Then
1.
COUNCIL MAKES the amended proposed Health, Safety and Amenity Amending
Local Law 2014, in Attachment B, submitted on file, to commence on the date of
gazettal;
2.
COUNCIL ADOPTS the consolidated Health, Safety and Amenity Local Law 2009,
tabled, and authorises the Chief Legal Counsel to insert the dates of commencement
and gazettal in the end notes of the consolidated version;
3.
COUNCIL AUTHORISES the Chief Legal Counsel to undertake all actions in
respect of the amended proposed local law and the consolidated local law required of
Council under the City of Brisbane Act 2010.
ADOPTED
B
PUBLIC LAND AND COUNCIL ASSETS LOCAL LAW 2014
155/455/468/28
228/2014-15
15.
The Chief Executive Officer provided the following information.
16.
Council resolved to propose to make the Public Land and Council Assets Local Law 2014
(the local law) on 9 September 2014, as a comprehensive local law providing for the
management and regulation of community activities (including commercial activities in or on
Council assets).
17.
Council assets include:
malls
Council-controlled roads
Council land
parkland, bushland, open space, sport and recreation and conservation land owned or
controlled by Council.
18.
Subsequent to this resolution, Council undertook extended public consultation from
12 September 2014 until 10 October 2014. At the same time, consultation with Queensland
Government entities took place.
19.
A fact sheet entitled Public Land and Council Assets Local Law 2014 – fact sheet was placed
on Council’s website on 15 September 2014. The fact sheet provided guidance on the types of
activities that can be carried out within Council parks and whether they could be carried out
with, or without, a permit. It also noted that fees would be only payable for activities
requiring the exclusive use of a designated park site, or for some commercial purposes.
20.
Council received 129 public submissions. The majority of submissions raised were in relation
to the requirement for obtaining permits, and fees for groups of people. Other submissions
raised concerns about the time required to obtain permits, perceptions of restricting the rights
of the public to access parks, and to speak in public, size of the fines associated with
infringements and prohibiting sleeping rough.
21.
All public submissions and departmental responses are tabled.
22.
As a result of the public submissions, some minor changes have been made to the local law.
These minor changes are set out in the Summary of Submissions table, which is also tabled.
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
- 46 -
23.
Of the 10 Queensland Government entities that responded to Council’s consultation, six
entities had no comments to make. The remaining four entities made a number of comments
and suggested amendments, which have been incorporated into the local law where relevant.
24.
Upon consideration of those submissions, Council may now proceed to make the local law
with or without amendments.
25.
Council is not required to undertake any further review of the anti-competitive provisions but
must notify the community of the existence of the anti-competitive provision when making
the local law.
26.
Additionally:
delegations to the Chief Executive Officer under the local law are required (which
will be made in accordance with the conditions in Attachment C, submitted on file)
consolidated versions of amended local laws are to be tabled and adopted
an amendment to a heading needs to be made in the Schedule of Fees and Charges
2014-15.
27.
A copy of the Community Guidelines - Use of Council Parks, which provide guidance to
Council officers on how to implement the law, is set out in Attachment D, submitted on file.
28.
The Chief Executive Officer provided the following recommendation and the Committee
agrees.
29.
RECOMMENDATION
THAT COUNCIL RESOLVE IN ACCORDANCE WITH ATTACHMENT A,
hereunder.
ATTACHMENT A
Draft Resolution
TO MAKE THE PUBLIC LAND AND COUNCIL ASSETS LOCAL LAW 2014, TO DELEGATE
POWERS UNDER THE LOCAL LAW TO THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, TO
AMEND A HEADING IN THE SCHEDULE OF FEES AND CHARGES 2014-15, TO NOTE
ANTI-COMPETITIVE PROVISIONS, AND TO ADOPT CONSOLIDATED LOCAL LAWS
THAT IT BE RESOLVED
As
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
Council resolved on 9 September 2014 to propose to make the Public Land and
Council Assets Local Law 2014 (the proposed local law);
Extended public consultation was undertaken between 12 September 2014 and
10 October 2014;
Relevant government entities were consulted about the proposed local law;
All public submissions and departmental responses are tabled;
Amendments have been made to the proposed local law both as a result of the public
consultation, and as a result of the relevant government entity consultation, and are as
indicated in the Summary of Submissions table;
Then
(i)
COUNCIL MAKES the Public Land and Council Assets Local Law 2014 in
Attachment B submitted on file, to commence on the date of gazettal;
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
- 47 -
(ii)
COUNCIL DELEGATES to the Chief Executive Officer all its powers under the
Public Land and Council Assets Local Law 2014, save those that must be exercised
by resolution, on the conditions set out in Attachment C, submitted on file;
(iii)
COUNCIL AMENDS the Schedule of Fees and Charges 2014-15, at page 44, by
deleting the words in the heading “Standing Vehicles, Stalls, Booths and Stands used
for the sale of food” and replacing it with the words “Standing Vehicles, Stalls,
Booths and Stands used for a commercial or promotional activity”;
(iv)
COUNCIL NOTES that the Public Land and Council Assets Local Law 2014
contains anti-competitive provisions;
(v)
COUNCIL ADOPTS Consolidated Versions of the following tabled local laws–
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
(f)
(g)
(vi)
Ferries, Jetties and Pontoons Local Law;
Health, Safety and Amenity Local Law 2009;
Legal Proceedings Local Law;
Parking and Control of Traffic Local Law;
Queen Street Mall Local Law;
Streets, Bridges, Culverts, Etc. Local Law;
Sundry Matters Relating to Structures Local Law.
COUNCIL AUTHORISES the Chief Legal Counsel to undertake all actions in
respect of the Public Land and Council Assets Local Law 2014 required of Council
under the City of Brisbane Act 2010.
ADOPTED
INFRASTRUCTURE COMMITTEE
DEPUTY MAYOR, Councillor Adrian SCHRINNER, Chairman of the Infrastructure Committee, moved,
seconded by Councillor Ian McKENZIE, that the report of the meeting of that Committee held on 28 October
2014, be adopted.
Chairman:
Is there any debate?
DEPUTY MAYOR:
Very briefly, Madam Chairman, there are four items on the agenda. First is a
presentation on Left Turn On Red, there are also three petitions there which are
self-explanatory. In the interest of brevity I'll leave it at that.
Chairman:
Further debate? Councillor GRIFFITHS.
Councillor GRIFFITHS:
Yes, Madam Chair.
Seriatim - Clause B
Councillor Steve GRIFFITHS requested that Clause B, PETITION – TRUCKS TRAVELLING ALONG KATE
STREET, ELLEN STREET AND PRESTON ROAD, CARINA, be taken seriatim for voting purposes.
Councillor GRIFFITHS:
Thank you. Just to talk a bit about this petition. This is the second lot of
petitions that have come through in relation to this issue that's affecting Acacia
Ridge. The first lot that were affecting Acacia Ridge were along Mortimer Road
and Council came up with a bit of a solution for that that I was happy to work
with them on. This issue relates to Watson Road which feeds into Mortimer
Road. Once again it's another truck route through the suburb of Acacia Ridge. It
is from another 70 residents. It does have very strong support from local
residents.
It does have strong support from local residents and also from Watson Road
State School and Our Lady of Fatima as well. It is really an area where we're
seeing the conflict between industry versus residents, schools, community
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
- 48 centres and so forth. Madam Chair, I am pleased that Council has taken this
action so one of the things that Council will be doing or I understand that they've
already done, is requested that the b-doubles be taken off Mortimer Road. So
they've applied to the State and the Federal Government in relation to that
particular issue.
The second issue is designing a signage plan to get trucks away from Mortimer
Road onto other preferred routes such as Kerry and Boundary Roads which are
the industrial parts of Archerfield. Reconsider classification of Kerry, Boundary
and Mortimer Roads 12 months from when the signage goes up so I think that's
reasonable. I'll certainly be keeping residents informed of that. Hopefully we can
get a classification to a level that discourages trucks from using Mortimer Road
and Watson Road.
In the 2015-16 budget we'll be looking at putting more pedestrian refuges on
Mortimer Road. Also a good outcome that's already been achieved is for the
school, Our Lady of Fatima which is on Mortimer Road, will actually receive
flashing lights there. So I'm pleased at that outcome already and I'll continue to
work for flashing lights along Watson Road as well. It all sounds reasonable in
the petition and so far I'm observing that these actions are occurring.
From my experience and from the residents' experience it will be in the
implementation but I'm happy to work with residents and Council to achieve this
outcome because longer term I think it's going to be a very good outcome for the
community.
Chairman:
Okay. Thank you. Further debate? DEPUTY MAYOR? Any comment? No
comment?
Chairman:
I will put the motion for items A, C and D.
Clauses A, C and D put
Upon being submitted to the meeting the motion for the adoption of Clauses A, C and D of the report of the
Infrastructure Committee was declared carried on the voices.
Chairman:
I will put the motion for item B.
Clause B put
Upon being submitted to the meeting the motion for the adoption of Clause B of the report of the Infrastructure
Committee was declared carried on the voices.
Thereupon, Councillors Peter CUMMING and Milton DICK immediately rose and called for a division, which
resulted in the motion being declared carried.
The voting was as follows:
AYES: 17 -
DEPUTY MAYOR,
Councillor
Adrian SCHRINNER,
and
Councillors
Krista ADAMS,
Matthew BOURKE,
Amanda COOPER,
Margaret de WIT,
Vicki HOWARD, Steven HUANG, Fiona KING, Geraldine KNAPP, Kim MARX,
Peter MATIC,
Ian McKENZIE,
David McLACHLAN,
Ryan MURPHY,
Angela OWEN-TAYLOR, Julian SIMMONDS and Andrew WINES.
NOES: 7 -
The Leader of the OPPOSITION, Councillor Milton DICK, and Councillors
Helen ABRAHAMS, Peter CUMMING, Kim FLESSER, Steve GRIFFITHS,
Victoria NEWTON, Shayne SUTTON and Nicole JOHNSTON.
The report read as follows
ATTENDANCE:
Deputy Mayor, Councillor Adrian Schrinner (Chairman), Councillor Ian McKenzie (Deputy
Chairman), and Councillors Milton Dick, Victoria Newton and Norm Wyndham.
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
- 49 -
LEAVE OF ABSENCE:
Councillor Margaret de Wit.
A
COMMITTEE PRESENTATION – LEFT TURN ON RED
229/2014-15
1.
Kin
Kan,
Traffic
Network
Engineer,
Congestion
Reduction
Unit,
Brisbane Infrastructure Division, attended the meeting to provide an update on
Left Turn on Red (LTOR). He provided the information below.
2.
Council trialled the LTOR traffic initiative across five intersections from November 2013.
The assessment of that trial program showed that there was a reduction in delays at the
LTOR locations. Traffic surveys throughout the trial also found that the number of vehicles
turning left on red increased, as the people’s awareness increased.
3.
Customer feedback surveys found that:
95 per cent understood how LTOR worked
85 per cent believed LTOR reduces delays for motorists
85 per cent felt LTOR movement is safe at the trial locations
85 per cent were supportive of additional sites being installed.
4.
The Lord Mayor announced the continued rollout of the LTOR project at up to 50 more
intersections across the City for the 2014-15 financial year. Ten sites have been identified to
be implemented with LTOR by November 2014:
Wolverhampton Street turn into Webster Road, Stafford
Bell Street (eastern leg) turn into Main Street, Kangaroo Point
Service Road (McDonalds side) turn into New Cleveland Road, Tingalpa
Yeronga Street turn into Fairfield Road, Yeronga
Durack Street turn into Ipswich Road, Moorooka
Mira Street turn into Poinsettia Street, Inala
Finsbury Street turn into Newmarket Road, Newmarket
Edmonstone Road turn into Breakfast Creek Road, Newstead
Glenealy Street turn into Bracken Ridge Road, Bracken Ridge
Constitution Road turn into Lutwyche Road, Windsor.
5.
Images of the above sites were displayed and explained in short.
6.
Site assessment is continuing and additional potential LTOR sites are being identified. The
Congestion Reduction Unit within the Brisbane Infrastructure Division is working closely
with the Department of Transport and Main Roads (TMR), Queensland Government, to
review and modify the LTOR guidelines to allow for more LTOR opportunities in Brisbane.
7.
A short video was shown, depicting the concept of LTOR.
8.
Following a number of questions from the Committee, the Chairman thanked the presenter for
the informative presentation.
9.
RECOMMENDATION:
THAT COUNCIL NOTE THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE ABOVE
REPORT.
ADOPTED
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
- 50 -
B
PETITION – TRUCKS TRAVELLING ALONG
ELLEN STREET AND PRESTON ROAD, CARINA
CA14/645872
KATE
STREET,
230/2014-15
10.
A petition requesting Council address concerns relating to trucks travelling along Fursden
Road, Kate Street, Ellen Street and Preston Road, Carina, was presented to the meeting of
Council held on 5 August 2014, by Councillor Ryan Murphy.
11.
The Branch Manager, Transport Planning and Strategy, Brisbane Infrastructure Division,
provided the following information.
12.
The petition contains 107 signatures.
13.
The petitioners have raised concerns with the current route that trucks accessing the
Goodman Fielder bakery on the corner of Fursden Road and Ellen Street are using.
The bakery has operated for 24 hours a day, 365 days a year for the majority of its existence.
The concerns raised by the petitioners include:
the number of large trucks that use this route 24 hours a day, 365 days a year has
increased
the trucks create a major noise disturbance for residents throughout the night and
early hours of the morning
the trucks pollute the air and pervade the area’s aesthetics.
14.
Consequently, the petitioners have requested that Council consider:
diverting large trucks going to and from a bakery in Ellen Street, Carina, from
surrounding residential streets onto Fursden Road
imposing a curfew on trucks operating in Fursden Road between 10pm and 6am.
15.
Fursden Road, Kate Street, Ellen Street and Preston Road are all designated as minor (local)
roads in the City Plan. The land bounded by these streets is zoned low-density residential or,
including the bakery site, emerging community. The land to the north and east is in the
Bulimba Creek corridor and zoned open space or for sport and recreation.
16.
Council records indicate a bakery first operated from the present site in 1960. Preston Road
was originally acreage sites including light industrial, with 20 Preston Road developed for
townhouses in 2009 and 38 Preston Road developed for townhouses in June 2012.
17.
In September 2014, an officer from Council, staff of the Goodman Fielder bakery and
Councillor Ryan Murphy, Councillor for Doboy Ward, met at the bakery. The Goodman
Fielder representatives expressed concerns that restricting all truck movements to and from
the bakery to Fursden Road was not desirable in terms of the bakery’s operations. Their main
concern was the safety of trucks turning right from Fursden Road at the unsignalised
intersection at Creek Road. They expressed the need for a risk assessment of the safety issues
associated with truck operations on the local streets. Council emphasised its shared interest in
the paramount importance of road safety for all road users.
18.
The Goodman Fielder representatives also expressed concerns that any change in local routes
would increase truck operating costs, although Goodman Fielder acknowledged that any
increase in route distance would generally be a very small fraction of the total route distance.
Council’s initial analysis suggests that diversion of routes away from Preston Road would not
add substantially to the length of most trips.
19.
A conclusion of the meeting was that more details about truck operations were needed.
Both Council and the Goodman Fielder bakery will collect data on truck movements,
including destinations, traffic analysis, road safety audit and a qualitative analysis of costs and
benefits, to enable Council to assess the impact of any route changes on truck operations and
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
- 51 -
safety at intersections. Following receipt of the bakery’s data, Council staff and
representatives from the Goodman Fielder bakery will meet again to discuss options,
including possible solutions.
20.
The operation of the bakery is a legitimate activity for the site and bakery operations require
appropriate access for service vehicles, including trucks, at all hours of the day. Restricting
truck movements to specific times would place significant hardship on these operations.
As a result, Council does not consider introducing restrictions or a curfew for truck
movements appropriate at this time.
Consultation
21.
The Councillor for Doboy Ward, Councillor Ryan Murphy, has been consulted and supports
the recommendation.
Preferred Option
22.
Advise the petitioners that Council and the Goodman Fielder bakery will undertake a
collection of data on truck movements, including destinations, traffic analysis, road safety
audit and assessment of costs and benefits. Following this, Council officers and
representatives from the Goodman Fielder bakery would meet again to discuss options,
including possible solutions. Any recommendations or solutions made from this data analysis
will be communicated to the head petitioner by the end of November 2014. Council does not
consider introducing restrictions or a curfew for truck movements appropriate at this time.
23.
The Branch Manager recommends as follows and the Committee agrees, with Councillors
Milton Dick and Victoria Newton abstaining from the vote.
24.
RECOMMENDATION:
THAT THE HEAD PETITIONER BE ADVISED OF THE INFORMATION
CONTAINED IN THIS REPORT, AND THAT COUNCIL ENDORSE THE
PREFERRED OPTION ABOVE.
ADOPTED
C
PETITIONS – TRAFFIC ISSUES ON WATSON ROAD AND MORTIMER
ROAD, ACACIA RIDGE
CA14/720308, CA14/731794 AND CA14/823681
231/2014-15
25.
A petition from residents, requesting that Council make Watson and Mortimer Roads,
between Beatty and Beaudesert Roads, Acacia Ridge, safer for the community, was presented
to the meeting of Council held on 26 August 2014, by Councillor Steve Griffiths.
26.
The Branch Manager, Transport Planning and Strategy, Brisbane Infrastructure Division,
provided the following information.
27.
Council has previously received two other petitions seeking to make Mortimer Road, between
Beatty and Beaudesert Roads, Acacia Ridge, safer for the community.
28.
Council has now received a further three petitions, one containing 19 signatures, the second
containing 45 signatures and the third containing six signatures, requesting to make
Watson and Mortimer Roads, between Beatty and Beaudesert Roads, Acacia Ridge, safer for
the community. The petitioners have requested Council make Watson and Mortimer Roads
safer for the community by:
re-directing B-doubles along alternative industrial routes
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
- 52 -
-
limiting the size of heavy vehicles and large trucks using the road
installing a School Safety Zone with flashing lights for our Lady of Fatima School
and Watson Road State School
installing additional traffic islands to assist residents in crossing the road safely to
parks and public transport
requesting police regularly enforce the speed limits.
Redirecting B-doubles along alternative industrial routes
29.
Mortimer Road is classified as a Suburban Route in Brisbane City Plan 2014. These types of
roads connect arterial roads in and around suburbs, and form important links in Brisbane’s
freight network. Mortimer Road provides a connection between Beaudesert Road and the
Archerfield industrial precinct. Mortimer Road was approved by TMR as a B-double route
between the hours of 9am and 4pm, Monday to Friday, prior to 2001.
30.
Council has recently undertaken a survey and review of heavy vehicle movements on
Mortimer Road and adjacent roads. The review has indicated that east-west B-double
movements between Beaudesert Road and Beatty Road can be best accommodated on
Kerry and Boundary Roads, both located north of Mortimer Road. Consequently, the
opportunity may exist to remove the B-double route designation from Mortimer Road.
31.
Following the introduction of the Heavy Vehicle National Law (HVNL) in February 2014, as
the local road manager, Council is responsible for authorising changes to B-double routes.
TMR, as the road authority, has some power to override the road manager’s decisions.
The National Heavy Vehicle Regulator (NHVR) handles applications for changes and issues
permits.
Limiting the size of heavy vehicles and large trucks
32.
Under the Queensland Road Rules, general access vehicles have unrestricted access to the
road system unless specific prohibitions are in place on particular roads. General access
vehicles include trucks, semi-trailers, articulated vehicles and buses up to 19 metres long.
Specific approvals are required for overweight or over-dimension vehicles such as B-doubles.
33.
Councils have some ability to place restrictions on vehicle movements in special
circumstances. However, under Council’s road hierarchy, roads classified as district,
suburban or arterial are expected to provide for a wide range of vehicle types.
Consequently, as Mortimer Road is a Suburban Route in the road hierarchy, restriction of
general access vehicles is not considered appropriate.
34.
However, Council will design and implement a signage plan to advise truck operators of the
preferred alternative route, via Kerry and Boundary Roads, to access Acacia Ridge and
Archerfield industrial precinct. It is anticipated that this will reduce those vehicles accessing
Mortimer Road.
35.
In addition, Council will also consider the classification of Kerry Road, Boundary Road and
Mortimer Road 12 months after the implementation of the signage plan to determine if
reclassifications of these roads in accordance with Austroads guidelines is needed.
Installing a School Safety zone with flashing lights for Our Lady of Fatima School and
Watson Road State School
36.
TMR has been rolling out Enhanced (flashing) School Zone signs at schools throughout
Brisbane, where it is considered to be high risk. These signs consist of a standard school zone
sign that incorporates a flashing red annulus and twin alternate flashing yellow lights mounted
above the ‘school zone’ sign plate. These lights flash during the operation of the school zone
and are intended to draw motorists’ attention to the operation of the school zone.
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
- 53 -
37.
Council, on behalf of residents, will formally contact TMR and advise them of the residents’
request for Enhanced School Zone signs at Watson Road State School. Council has
commenced discussions with TMR in relation to altering the signal timings along
Beaudesert Road, to encourage vehicles to use the preferred alternative route via Kerry and
Boundary Roads.
Installing additional traffic islands so residents can cross the road safely to parks and public
transport
38.
Council has identified Mortimer Road as one where improvements or additions to
pedestrian crossing facilities may improve pedestrian connectivity and safety. This project has
been listed for detailed investigation work in Council’s Network Modernisation schedule, and
will include a review of pedestrian connectivity and safety along the full length of the road.
39.
As funding for the Network Modernisation schedule is already committed through the budget
for this financial year, including Troughton Road in nearby Coopers Plains, the priority of the
Network Modernisation project for Mortimer Road will be considered in line with similar
citywide priorities in the 2015-16 Council budget.
Requesting Police regularly enforce the speed limits
40.
Council does not have the authority to enforce moving vehicle violations. If motorists are
observed speeding on Mortimer Road, the Queensland Police Service (QPS) have asked that
they are notified directly on 131 444. When phoning, if residents can provide details such as
the times and days this is more likely to occur, it will help QPS coordinate their speed
enforcement activities.
Consultation
41.
The Moorooka Ward Councillor, Councillor Steve Griffiths, has been consulted and supports
the recommendation.
Preferred option
42.
It is the preferred option that Council undertake the following actions:
Advise the petitioners that Council is currently seeking to rescind the approval given
for the B-double route designation for Mortimer Road issued prior to 2001.
Advise the petitioners that Council is designing a signage plan to advise truck
operators of the preferred alternative routes to access Acacia Ridge and Archerfield
industrial precinct.
Advise the petitioners that Council is considering signage to encourage large trucks to
use routes other than Watson Road.
Advise the petitioners that Council will reconsider the classification of Kerry,
Boundary and Mortimer Roads, 12 months after the implementation of the signage
plan.
Advise the petitioners that construction of additional pedestrian refuges is listed for
consideration in the 2015/16 Council budget, with funds already committed this
financial year to nearby Troughton Road, Coopers Plains.
Advise the petitioners that Council has received advice from TMR, that they will be
installing Enhanced School Zone signage on Mortimer Road in front of Our Lady of
Fatima School by mid-2015 and are continuing discussions in regard to altering the
signal timings along Beaudesert Road.
Advise the petitioners that Council will commence discussions with TMR on their
behalf, to request Enhanced School Zone signage for Watson Road in front of
Watson Road State School.
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
- 54 -
-
Advise the petitioners that they contact Queensland Police Service (QPS) directly on
131 444 if they observe motorists exceeding the speed limit on Mortimer Road.
43.
The Branch Manager recommends as follows and the Committee agrees
44.
RECOMMENDATION:
THAT THE HEAD PETITIONER BE ADVISED OF THE INFORMATION
CONTAINED IN THIS REPORT, AND THAT COUNCIL ENDORSE THE
PREFERRED OPTION ABOVE.
ADOPTED
D
PETITION – PARKING CHANGES IN MARMION PARADE, TARINGA
CA14/774280
232/2014-15
45.
A petition from residents, requesting Council consider the residents’ objections to parking
restrictions in Marmion Parade, Taringa and support the removal of time-limited parking in
the street was received during the Spring Recess 2014.
46.
The Branch Manager, Transport Planning and Strategy, Brisbane Infrastructure Division,
provided the following information.
47.
The petition contains 18 signatures from residents representing nine households near
Marmion Parade Taringa. The petitioners have requested that Council not proceed with
proposed No Stopping restrictions in Marmion Parade between Harrys Road and
Frederick Street, Taringa, and that the current time limit of four hour parking be removed.
Seven households supported the proposition, one objected and one household both supported
and objected to the proposition.
48.
The Walter Taylor Ward office recently consulted with residents about extending No
Stopping restrictions in Marmion Parade between Harrys Road and Frederick Street. 76
households were consulted, with nine responses supporting the extension and seven responses
not supporting the restriction.
49.
The additional information provided by the current petition indicates a majority of the
community now do not support further parking restrictions in Marmion Parade.
50.
The proposed No Stopping restriction would have eliminated six on-street parking spaces on
the southern side of Marmion Parade, to which no time limit applies. Parking on the northern
side of the street is limited to four hours to prevent use by employees of nearby businesses
and commuters.
51.
In the second proposal of the petition, the petitioners request removal of the four hour limit to
make parking on the northern side of Marmion Parade available to residents. This is based on
the premise that the six unregulated spaces on the southern side of the street would no longer
be available.
Consultation
52.
The Councillor for Walter Taylor Ward, Councillor Julian Simmonds, has been consulted and
supports the recommendation.
Preferred option
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
- 55 -
53.
It is the preferred option that Council advise the head petitioners that it is not proposed to
proceed with further parking No Stopping restrictions in Marmion Parade between
Frederick Street and Harrys Road. Also, parking for residents will remain available on the
southern side of Marmion Parade. It is not proposed to remove the four hour limit on the
northern side of the street.
54.
The Branch Manager recommends as follows and the Committee agrees.
55.
RECOMMENDATION:
THAT THE HEAD PETITIONER BE ADVISED OF THE INFORMATION
CONTAINED IN THIS REPORT, AND THAT COUNCIL ENDORSE THE
PREFERRED OPTION ABOVE.
ADOPTED
PUBLIC AND ACTIVE TRANSPORT COMMITTEE
Councillor Peter MATIC, Chairman of the Public and Active Transport Committee, moved, seconded by
Councillor Steven HUANG that the report of that Committee held on 28 October 2014, be adopted.
Chairman:
Is there any debate?
Councillor MATIC:
Just briefly, Madam Chairman, firstly the committee presentation on the North
Brisbane Bikeway. Madam Chairman, I just want to acknowledge the work of
the officers and the State Government in this rolling project, Madam Chairman,
continuing to provide significant improvements in safety and amenity for
cyclists on the north side of Brisbane. The stages, Madam Chairman, currently
underway in regards to the Royal Brisbane Hospital, which will have a
dedicated bikeway through the RNA to Bowen Park, Madam Chairman, then
there will be a joint effort between TMR and Brisbane City Council on the
continuation of the bikeway improvements along that section.
Part of the presentation also, Madam Chairman, looked at Council's Black Spot
Project at Bridge Street and Hudson Road which will also be integrated into that
longer-term project the State Government is undertaking, past that section of the
intersection. Overall, Madam Chairman, it's a great effort and will provide a
huge benefit to cyclists on the northside of Brisbane.
The second item, Madam Chairman, is a petition to committee for
improvements to Bridgeman Downs which has 78 signatures, requesting a
number of improvements, Madam Chairman. It's set out in the report itself and
has the recommendations that are proposed in there as well.
Chairman:
Further debate? Councillor GRIFFITHS.
Councillor GRIFFITHS:
Yes, okay thank you.
Seriatim - Clause B
Councillor Steve GRIFFITHS requested that Clause B, PETITION – NEW ACTIVE TRANSPORT
INFRASTRUCTURE - BRIDGEMAN DOWNS, be taken seriatim for voting purposes.
Chairman:
Thank you. Further debate? Councillor JOHNSTON.
Councillor JOHNSTON:
Yes, Madam Chairman. I rise to make a few comments with respect to item B,
I'm sorry, the new footpaths and bikeways in Councillor WYDNHAM's ward. In
committee last week, I did ask a number of questions about this matter because
it appears there are some pretty strong inconsistencies coming forward with
respect to the consideration of petitions when it comes to the use of councillors'
Ward Footpath and Parks Trust Funds which are as we all know, are there for
councillors to spend on local works in our wards.
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
- 56 In particular the LORD MAYOR likes to stand up week after week and say that
funds are available for building footpaths and they're available for building
playgrounds and lights and dog off-leash areas and everything else. However,
what we are seeing here is an extraordinary partisan application of the use of the
trust fund. Now in every Labor councillor's petitions that come through or in
mine, the recommendation is always that it can be funded either from capital
works or from the local ward councillor's trust funds. Now that's normal.
We are all told and the LORD MAYOR loves to tell me this: fund it out of your
fund Councillor JOHNSTON. Well why on earth is that same rule not being
applied to Councillor WYNDHAM? Why is it the LNP councillors are special?
They don't have to use the $412,000 that they've got this year to build new
footpaths. They'll just get listed on the capital works fund and they'll be funded
from the millions of dollars, the $17 million that the LORD MAYOR allocates
on top of the local funds for the footpaths.
So to be consistent at least, this is the issue, to be consistent. If the rules are that
councillors should use their Ward Footpath and Parks Trust Funds then that
should apply to all councillors, shouldn't just be Councillor NEWTON that's told
she should fund her dog park out of it.
It shouldn't just be me that's told I should fund a light for the dog park or a new
footpath in Oriel Road, Yeronga. I think every other councillor on this side of
the Chamber can point to a similar recommendation that has come through, but
apparently Councillor WYNDHAM's special.
He doesn't need to spend his money on footpaths in his area. It's alright; the
money that he's been given to do so it's not needed for that purpose. I don't know
what he's going to do with it, but it's alright because the LORD MAYOR will
fund it out of the budget allocation, not out of the footpath funds that are
allocated to each councillor.
Well I think that's smacks of hypocrisy. It is clearly inappropriate that the LNP
councillors are prioritising their own areas and not—
Chairman:
Councillor JOHNSTON—Councillor JOHNSTON please get back to this item.
Councillor JOHNSTON:
I am, Madam Chairman.
Chairman:
No you're not. Councillor JOHNSTON you are talking about how other
councillors spend their funding. That is not relevant to this particular item; get
back to the item.
Councillor JOHNSTON:
I draw your attention, Madam Chairman, to paragraphs 33, 34, 35, 29—
Chairman:
I don't care what you draw my attention to. I'm telling you to stick to this item
about these paths that are out in the Bridgeman Downs area.
Councillor JOHNSTON:
Madam Chairman, well let me quote them—
Chairman:
Don't argue.
Councillor JOHNSTON:
Righto, Madam Chairman.
Chairman:
Or resume your seat.
Councillor JOHNSTON:
Even though there's four or five paragraphs in here that are clearly about—and
the issue is contentious—about how they are funded.
The question I have here is why Councillor WYNDHAM has not been asked to
have his footpaths funded from his trust fund. Every other councillor is asked to
do that, Madam Chairman, and I think there should be consistency in the way
the rules are applied by this Council. But Councillor WYNDHAM is special. He
doesn't need to actually use his footpath money to build footpaths.
So I moved an amendment last time that—in the committee last week I'm
sorry—that funding for the new footpaths is provided through the McDowall
Ward's parks and footpath trust fund administered by Councillor WYNDHAM.
Now the reason I moved that amendment is because there are actually three
things that are proposed to be done here; (1) is a bigger bikeway, which it is
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
- 57 reasonable that it is listed for capital works; (2) the footpath upgrades, which it
is reasonable that they are funded from Councillor WYNDHAM's trust funds;
the third one is some major improvements to roads that the Department of
Transport and Main Roads is going to do.
So it is unclear to me why the LNP is not using the funds that are immediately
available to Councillor WYNDHAM to fund this footpath requested by the
residents. That's what they want. Why is he not prepared to do it? Did he survey;
did he do anything that the residents wanted to do? We don't know.
Is he going to use the funds that have been allocated for him for that purpose?
No, he is not. Now that is what I am pointing to in terms of the problem with
this motion put before us today. It is unreasonable that the LNP are not directing
the funds that are available to Councillor WYNDHAM to be used for the
purposes of new footpaths to be done so.
I am very concerned about the double standard that's going on here, and I think
it simply is wrong that the LNP councillors are quarantining their funds and
expecting it all to be paid from capital works and not respecting the requests of
their residents.
Chairman:
Councillor JOHNSTON I'm asking you to withdraw that statement because it is
quite offensive. Again you're talking about the LNP councillors plural. I have
brought you back several times to this particular item. You are imputing motive
and I find that quite unacceptable. Now you speak to this item or you resume
your seat.
Councillor JOHNSTON:
Madam Chairman, the item says it's funded out of capital works.
Chairman:
It's talking about—yes, it is talking about this item, not about other LNP
councillors.
Councillor JOHNSTON:
Well Councillor WYNDHAM is an LNP councillor.
Chairman:
You have said the same thing over and over. It's extremely repetitive and you
are trying to get across a point that I find quite offensive. You are imputing
motive in terms of how money is spent in LNP councillors' wards.
Councillor JOHNSTON:
In Councillor WYNDHAM's ward, Madam Chairman.
Chairman:
No, that's not what you've been saying Councillor JOHNSTON. You have been
talking about LNP councillors plural. Don't argue with me. Resume your seat.
Resume your seat.
Councillor JOHNSTON:
You're outrageous. I mean I can't believe it.
Chairman:
Resume your seat. Further debate? Councillor MATIC?
Councillor MATIC:
Thank you, Madam Chairman. If there's one thing that is consistent about
Councillor JOHNSTON in this Chamber is that she continues to misinterpret
literally what is written on the paper before her.
To clarify for the benefit of the Chamber and those who are prepared to actually
read the facts before us, nothing that Councillor JOHNSTON said is actually
within the options that are preferred. The size of the works that were presented
by the petitioners far exceeds anything within any of our parks and footpaths
trust funding. The works that are needed to be done are needed to be done in a
collective way rather than an ad hoc way, and nowhere does it say within any of
these preferred options that the capital works that are proposed are to be
included in any future Budget by this administration.
What it simply says at paragraph 29, it literally says that funding has not been
committed to this financial year and Council will consider the delivery and
priority of the requested upgrades in line with similar citywide priorities in a
future budget, Madam Chairman. Simply, that they will be considered as other
submissions made by councillors on both sides of this Chamber; are considered
in a similar way with future priorities across the city as a whole.
So what we've literally heard from Councillor JOHNSTON has absolutely no
fact in basis to what was set out within this—within the options presented to us,
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
- 58 but has simply wasted the Chamber's time once again on misleading and selfserving statements. Thank you.
Chairman:
I will put the motion for item A.
Clause A put
Upon being submitted to the meeting the motion for the adoption of Clause A of the report of the Public and
Active Transport Committee was declared carried on the voices.
Chairman:
I'll put the motion for item B.
Clause B put
Upon being submitted to the meeting the motion for the adoption of Clause B of the report of the Public and
Active Transport Committee was declared carried on the voices.
The report read as follows
ATTENDANCE:
Councillor Steven Huang (Deputy Chairman), and Councillors Steve Griffiths, Nicole Johnston, Kim
Marx and Ryan Murphy.
LEAVE OF ABSENCE:
Councillor Peter Matic (Chairman).
A
COMMITTEE PRESENTATION – NORTH BRISBANE BIKEWAY
233/2014-15
1.
Mark Pattemore, Project and Program Manager, Transport Planning and Strategy, Brisbane
Infrastructure Division, attended the meeting to provide an update on the North Brisbane
Bikeway. He provided the information below.
2.
This is a new Council bikeway project in partnership with the Queensland Government. It is
projected to increase cycling in Brisbane’s northern suburbs, due for completion by end
2017-18.
3.
Details of all the stages of the North Brisbane Bikeway were explained.
4.
An aerial photo of the bikeway showing alignment from the Central Business District (CBD)
to Chermside was displayed with details given by the presenter.
5.
A close-up image of the bikeway construction was displayed, showing the bikeway from
Gilchrist Avenue to Bowen Park, Herston, under construction.
6.
This project is being designed by the Department of Transport and Main Roads (TMR),
Queensland Government, in close cooperation with Council. The project is on Council roads
and the asset will transfer to Council ownership on completion. This project integrates with a
Council Black Spot project at Bridge Street and Hudson Road, Albion. A detailed image of
this intersection was displayed.
7.
A diagram of integrated design between Council and TMR projects at Bridge Street and
Hudson Road was displayed with details.
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
- 59 -
8.
An image of an example design of the priority cycle crossing was shown to the Committee,
followed by a video depicting the visualisation of the route. Mr Pattemore spoke of all the
safety and other distinctive features of the project at this stage.
9.
Following a number of questions from the Committee, the Chairman thanked Mr Pattemore
for his informative presentation.
10.
RECOMMENDATION:
THAT COUNCIL NOTE THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE ABOVE
REPORT.
ADOPTED
B
PETITION – NEW ACTIVE
BRIDGEMAN DOWNS
CA14/749043 and CA14/762531
TRANSPORT
INFRASTRUCTURE
-
234/2014-15
11.
Two petitions from residents, requesting Council construct new bikeways and footpaths in
Bridgeman Downs, were received during the Spring Recess 2014.
12.
The Branch Manager, Transport Planning and Strategy, Brisbane Infrastructure Division,
supplied the following information.
13.
The petitions contain a total of 78 signatures.
14.
The petitions highlight the breaks in the connectivity of the current bikeway network in this
area and potential blind spots along Albany Creek Road and requests the following
improvements to the active transport network in Bridgeman Downs to make walking and
cycling more connected, efficient, comfortable and safer for the community:
extend the existing Wendon Way Bikeway to the Beckett and Albany Creek Roads
intersection
construct footpaths on both sides of Albany Creek Road, between Beckett Road and
Bangalow Street
construct a pedestrian and cyclist crossing on Albany Creek Road, between Beckett
Road and Bangalow Street
construct footpaths on both sides of Beckett Road, between both intersections with
Saturn Crescent
extend the Wendon Way Bikeway to the Albany Shopping Precinct.
Extending the Wendon Way Bikeway to the Beckett Road and Albany Creek Road
intersection
15.
The petition requests that the existing Wendon Way Bikeway be extended adjacent to the
boundary of the Darien Street Sports Grounds with an egress constructed at the unused road
corridor at the intersection of Beckett Road and Albany Creek Road.
16.
The requested north-south bikeway extension from Darien Street, adjacent to the sports
grounds is identified in the City Plan 2014 Bicycle Network Overlay as a Secondary Cycle
Route. A Secondary Cycle Route is a bicycle route that provides linkages between residential
areas and primary routes, and suburban destinations such as schools, suburban centres,
cultural activity areas and recreational facilities. This Secondary Cycle Route then runs along
the southern border of the Albany Creek Cemetery and connects to Beckett Road at the
unused road corridor mentioned in the petition. The Secondary Cycle Route then continues to
the Beckett Road and Albany Creek Road intersection.
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
- 60 -
17.
In City Plan 2014, cycle routes are an indicative alignment. As such, until the bikeway
progresses to a design phase, it cannot be determined if the link along Beckett Road to the
intersection with Albany Creek Road will use the unused road corridor, or the existing road
corridor.
18.
Projects within Council’s current bikeway program are committed for 2014-15 and 2015-16.
The future delivery and priority of the requested bikeway extensions will be considered in
line with similar citywide priorities in a future budget.
Constructing footpaths on both sides of Albany Creek Road from Beckett Road to Bangalow
Street
19.
The petition requests that footpaths be constructed on both sides of Albany Creek Road from
Beckett Road to Bangalow Street. The construction of new footpaths is funded through the
Ward Footpath Trust Fund. Requests for construction of new footpaths are referred to the
relevant local Councillor for consideration with respect to ward-wide priorities and budget
availability. The petitioners’ request can be referred to the Councillor for consideration.
20.
The requested link is identified in the City Plan 2014 Bicycle Network Overlay as a
‘Primary Cycle Route’. A Primary Cycle Route is a high capacity cycle route that provides
for all cyclists, including high speed commuters, links residential areas to major employment
centres, regional activity centres and other key destinations, including public transport,
educational, cultural and recreation facilities. Primary cycle routes may be on-road or off-road
or a combination of facilities. For Albany Creek Road, this could include consideration of a
shared pedestrian and cycle pathway within the footpath verge.
21.
Albany Creek Road is a State Controlled Road. Provision of cycling infrastructure along this
corridor will require consultation with TMR.
Constructing a crossing on Albany Creek Road, between Beckett Road and Bangalow Street
22.
Albany Creek Road is a State Controlled Road managed by TMR. As such, the consideration
of pedestrian and cycling crossings is best undertaken by TMR.
Constructing footpaths on Beckett Road, between both intersections with Saturn Crescent
23.
The petition requests that footpaths be constructed on both sides of Beckett Road, between
both intersections with Saturn Crescent. Footpaths already exist on the eastern side of the
road. On the western side of the road, the footpath is incomplete, with footpaths only existing
on the northern and southern extremities of the requested link. The requested link is identified
in the City Plan 2014 Bicycle Network Overlay as a ‘Secondary Cycle Route’. In City Plan
2014, future Secondary Cycle Routes can be and are often designed as shared paths for use by
pedestrians and cyclists.
24.
Council has an allocation in the Lord Mayor’s $120 million Better Bikeways for Brisbane
program in the current financial year to carry out design investigations for cycling
improvements on Beckett Road in the area around the Cabbage Tree Creek Bikeway. Funding
has not been committed in future years for project construction. If a feasible design can be
developed, the project will be considered in line with similar citywide priorities in a future
budget.
Extend the Wendon Way Bikeway to the Albany Shopping Precinct
25.
The petition requests that the Wendon Way Bikeway be extended to the
Albany Shopping Precinct, located within Moreton Bay Regional Council. Item 15 above
addresses a connection to the Beckett Road and Albany Creek Road intersection. Regarding a
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
- 61 -
bikeway extension to the Albany Creek Shopping Precinct, the requested link is identified in
the City Plan 2014 Bicycle Network Overlay as a ‘Primary Cycle Route’.
26.
As the requested bikeway extension is already being considered by Council as part of the
future bikeway network and funding has not been committed in the budget for this financial
year, the future delivery and priority of the requested bikeway extension will be considered in
line with similar citywide priorities in a future budget.
Consultation
27.
The Councillor for McDowall Ward, Councillor Norm Wyndham, has been consulted and
supports the recommendation.
Preferred Option
28.
That Council advises the head petitioner that Council supports the suggestions regarding:
extending the Wendon Way Bikeway to the Beckett Road and Albany Creek Road
intersection; constructing footpaths on both sides of Albany Creek Road from Beckett Road
to Bangalow Street; constructing footpaths on Beckett Road, between both intersections with
Saturn Crescent; and extending the Wendon Way Bikeway to the Albany Shopping Precinct.
29.
Whilst funding has not been committed in the budget for this financial year, Council will
consider the delivery and priority of the requested upgrades in line with similar citywide
priorities in a future budget.
30.
Council will contact the Department of Transport and Main Roads, Queensland Government
on their behalf to request a safe crossing point on Albany Creek Road, between Beckett Road
and Bangalow Street as this section of road is State-controlled, and not owned or managed by
Council.
31.
That Council has completed a number of recent cycling projects in this general area
including: Cabbage Tree Creek Stage 6, Beckett Road crossing, Cabbage Tree Creek Stage 3,
Gympie Road underpass to Dorville Road and Hamilton Road upgrade project, which
included bike lanes.
32.
That Council has allocated funding in the Lord Mayor’s $120 million Better Bikeways 4
Brisbane program for the current financial year to carry out design investigations for cycling
improvements on Beckett Road in the area around the Cabbage Tree Creek Bikeway. Funding
has not been committed in future years for project construction. If a feasible design can be
developed, the project will be considered in line with similar citywide priorities in a future
budget.
Amendment motion
33.
During consideration of the petition submission, Councillor Nicole Johnston moved that the
sentence ‘Whilst funding has not been committed in the budget for this financial year,
Council will consider the delivery and priority of the requested upgrades in line with similar
citywide priorities in a future budget’ be replaced with the following:
“That funding for the new footpaths is provided through the McDowall Ward Parks and
Footpaths Trust Fund administered by Councillor Wyndham”.
34.
After debate, the Chairman put the vote to the Committee and it was declared lost, with
Councillor Steve Griffiths and Nicole Johnston voting in favour.
35.
The Branch Manager recommends as follows and the Committee agrees.
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
- 62 -
36.
RECOMMENDATION:
THAT THE PETITIONERS BE ADVISED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE
PREFERRED OPTION ABOVE AND OF THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN
THE ABOVE REPORT.
ADOPTED
NEIGHBOURHOOD PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT
COMMITTEE
Councillor Amanda COOPER, Chairman of the Neighbourhood Planning and Development Assessment
Committee, moved, seconded by Councillor Vicki HOWARD, that the report of the meeting of that Committee
held on 28 October 2014, be adopted.
Chairman:
Is there any debate?
Councillor COOPER:
Yes, thank you very much, Madam Chair. At committee last week we had a
presentation. This presentation may well be setting a record for the longest ever
presentation to committee. I believe it was just over 50 minutes and the
presenter spoke the whole way through without even a sip of water, so that was
quite astonishing.
So I think this particular committee presentation was one that was very worthy
of discussion. It was an overview of the Queensland State Government's draft
Planning and Development (PaD) Bill. So it was clear to the committee—and
there were a number of questions raised and discussed as a consequence of this
presentation—that there has been a really significant reform agenda of the State
Government where they are looking at the State planning system. They are
reviewing it and certainly under the Department of State Development
Infrastructure and Planning there has been a whole new planning bill proposed.
That process started in 2012, which is very much in line with what we've done
with our City Plan 2014. When we try to do our planning we try to make sure
it's simpler, clearer, that it's more upfront, clearly evident as to what the
outcomes were, and this sort of process has been very much the process that the
State Government have undertaken.
So they're looking to make sure that they are removing unnecessary and
burdensome regulation, so the Sustainable Planning Act 2009 (SPA), something
we have all raised a number of issues with, has got an inordinate amount of
duplication, lots of information provided all over the place. This is trying to
bring it all together and make it very clear as to what the intentions are.
In the past there's been a lot of confusion, and in fact I think the legal system
probably really loves that opportunity to be the only ones who can genuinely
make a clear understanding of exactly what is required, and that is always
something that's up for debate.
So in this new proposed Act we will see the greater clarity of purpose that is
being certainly sought by the State Government, and indeed I think all residents
and people who enact and deal with these sorts of matters.
So it's a draft. There is two months of consultation that started from 1 August to
26 September. It is to try and create a planning system to specifically replace
SPA that is also to balance up community wellbeing, economic growth and
environmental protection.
There's a very good document, the draft Planning and Development Bill 2014
information paper that has been put up on the website so you can understand
exactly what the intent is of the work that they are doing.
There is four different streams of activity that is being undertaken. So the first
one is about the legislation, the second is about plan making, the third is about
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
- 63 development assessment and the fourth is about the hardware or the ICT
components to make that all happen.
There's also as part of the reform, there's the Single State Planning Policy (SPP),
there's the State Assessment and Referral Agency known as SARA, there's also
the State Development Assessment Provisions, so lots of acronyms for us all to
learn, and of course the Infrastructure Charges Reform.
There's some key differences between the draft document and SPA. The draft
PaD is significantly shorter. There are fewer State planning instruments under
the draft. The SPP is the primary policy direction, it sets it, regional plans and
then local government planning schemes, so it continues to have that hierarchy.
Other differences include the development assessment system being detailed
outside of the draft PaD document. The levels of assessment, the transitional
provisions are proposed also to be much shorter and simpler and a Planning and
Environment Court provisions will be undertaken under a separate bill.
As we heard, there's similarities in that local governments making planning
schemes is still required. State provisions will still sit over local government
provisions, infrastructure designations will remain, development applications
and referrals also remain, and dispute resolution and compensation remain as
does infrastructure, planning and charging.
So I'd particularly like to thank Marcus Mulholland who presented at committee
last week. I think it was a very informed presentation with lots of detail and
certainly it gave us a very clear understanding of what's proposed in the draft
document. So this is not a final document, but it is certainly a work that is
currently underway. Thank you.
Chairman:
Further debate? Councillor DICK?
Councillor DICK:
Thanks, Madam Chair, and I rise to speak on the committee report, and I note in
Councillor COOPER's remarks she didn't say whether she thought this was a
good idea or bad idea, this new Planning and Development Bill.
Yes, it is the draft Bill that's come in and I too will be referring to the
information paper and consultation draft and touching on the things that
Councillor COOPER conveniently or perhaps chose not to refer to in her report.
Fundamentally, I want to touch on around six themes, and I questioned the
LORD MAYOR today and Councillor COOPER's been asked twice about the
Council's submission to this Bill. We know that the Council has placed a
submission regarding this Bill. What I want to know is what was in it? What did
we highlight or what did we object to, or as I suspect just a rubber stamp for,
listening to those remarks today, a glowing endorsement for, what I believe, is a
further erosion of residents' rights. But worse still an obscene power grab by the
LNP State Government, the step in powers, only step on local councils' rights.
So I want to know did this Council stand up to the LNP State Government and
say we reject what you're doing, or did we secretly go along with it? I guess we
will find out whether the LORD MAYOR has the ticker next week to release the
submission. Councillor COOPER's been asked twice now in committee for it,
refused to do it. Refused to release the submission because we're told one day it
will be available.
Well if the Council has on behalf of the ratepayers of Brisbane lodged a
submission I think they deserve to know what was in that submission. Now the
devil is in the detail and I believe there will be significant impacts for local
governments as we've just heard within the regulations, which have not yet been
released. I'd also like to know what does this mean once this Bill is enacted.
I know there is one or two more weeks of parliament this year that I suspect the
Bill will be rushed in, and what that means for City Plan—we know it only
came into effect six months ago—and if this Bill goes ahead, I know and we all
know there will be significant changes. This is not a simple tick and flick
approach or find and replace fix. It is a fundamental change and the work
involved and the cost involved will be huge to this Council.
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
- 64 So has the LORD MAYOR signed off on this and what did the Brisbane City
Council say in their submission? So I want to refer to point 13 in the report,
which is on page 2, Madam Chair, and reference to the landowner's consent is
no longer required to make an application as listed in the report.
The draft Planning and Development Bill 2014 information paper on the
consultation draft—and I quote—says: “it is proposed that the requirement for
an owner's consent as a mandatory pre-condition to lodging a development
application no longer apply, and that the assessment manager has the discretion
to accept an application as properly made even if the required owner's consent is
not provided”, and that's page 10.
“It is also proposed that current owner's consent requirements to be moved for
most State-owned land, servient tenement or acquisition land, and also owner's
consent for development applications involving State land is not required under
the Bill.”
So, Madam Chair, I know in the committee report I'm advised by Councillor
SUTTON and Councillor ABRAHAMS that Councillor COOPER—and I'm
paraphrasing here—basically said she doesn't think that this one will fly or
proceed. How does she know that? Has there been dialogue and has there been
discussion with the Deputy Premier or the LNP apparatchiks who will be
deciding the fate of this Bill before it goes to the parliament?
So I really would like to know if we're dead against that and we put that in our
submission, great. If not, why haven't we opposed that? I note the ministerial
powers—I'm conscious of the time. I will be brief but there's a couple of issues
here, and I reference point 9 in the report, Madam Chair, which the State
provisions sit over local government provisions.
In the information paper in the consultation draft it says the ministers' powers
have been restricted, consolidated and some anomalies addressed such as
consistency in terms used in powers, like expanding the call in power to include
not just the application but also changes to approvals and extension to currency
periods and rewriting the natural justice period provisions that exercise for the
ministerial powers on page 11.
So the later clarification overcomes a cumbersome and quote” Unproductive
step that was introduced to the call in process in recent years for submissions to
be made before a decision was made to call in an application. “
This is the question I was asking the LORD MAYOR and he fobbed around and
wouldn't answer it: have we signed off on that so when a call in provision
happens there's no more submissions involved? So people are kept out of the
process, locked out of the process. We know that that happens from time to time
with the ministerial directions, and I reference point 9, the State provisions sit
over local government provisions in the report.
One page 2, ministerial directions to development applications are no longer
provided for. Ministerial directions in relation to development applications may
only be made to assessment managers or referral agencies, and must involve or
are likely to involve a State interest.
So the provisions clarify that the minister need not consult with anyone before
exercising the power. So this is nothing more than an obscene grab for power by
the LNP government. Now of all the toxic things that the LNP State
Government has done—and that's why the community is turning their back on
the LNP State Government after such a short time—this grab for power over the
rights and responsibility of local government—and when you think about it half
the Cabinet comes straight out of local government including the Premier who
was a former Lord Mayor. Could you imagine a former Labor State Government
saying you're going to be shut out of the process, we're going to stomp on your
powers and Campbell Newman being okay about that.
Let's remember, Madam Chair, remember when the former Labor government
tried to tinker around with the duplexes and how the whole Council went
berserk about that. We had the reports, we had the urgency motions. Well,
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
- 65 Madam Chair, this is—and I'm not surprised, it was all vague in the language
today—it's simplification. That's what the LNP councillors hang their hat on.
This is a grab for power. This is the State Government stomping on the rights
and responsibility of this Council and every other council in Brisbane.
So there's a new thing called Step In and this is the State provisions that sit over
local government provisions. In the consultation—I love this wording—the Step
In is a new ministerial power that enables the minister to step in—and in my
opinion, stomp on—and decide or direct the assessment manager or responsible
entity to take action in relation to a change, extension or cancellation
application.
As with the minister's call in power, the power may be exercised only if the
application involves or is likely to involve a state interest. So the Bill also
clarifies the minister need not consult with anyone before excising the power. So
Jeff Seeney aka Russ Hinze, not happy with what a council's doing, Madam
Chair, comes in over the top and says righto, not happy, out you go, out the
door, I'm going to fix this.
Now, Madam Chair, we know that these powers can be misused and I am deeply
concerned of this new power, this Step In or step on local government.
I come to my last point, notification, which is point 5 in today's presentation.
The community will have confidence that the planning system promotes and
protects their interests. I love these Orwellian terms. The draft says:
“notification of merit assessable development may be required by the
categorising instrument. Unlike impact assessment under SPA, notification is
not mandatory for all merit-assessable development applications.”
So here we go, watering it down, winding it back, getting what the developers
want rather than what the community wants. Now I've got huge concerns about
this and I want to know did the Council stand up and say jump on your bike, we
do not support this, we want control over development and we want residents to
have a say? Well looking at the track form of this LNP Council I suspect not.
Decoupling—in reference to point 5 about the community having confidence
with the planning system and protects their interests. Public notification and
level of assessment are decoupled—decoupled. Merit assessment will not
automatically require public notification and the type of application requiring
notification will be prescribed separately through a categorising instrument.
Well I want to know why we are simply giving the green light to removing
public notification.
Now I know this is a draft Bill, Madam Chair, but this is clearly what the
government's intention are. This is clearly what the LNP State Government
want. More control, more say, watering down local government and shutting
residents out of the process.
If this is the draft to stand by, I can tell you this: I will be working with residents
opposing this ridiculous grab for power by the LNP State Government and
standing up for the rights of ratepayers of this city.
Chairman:
Thank you. Further debate? Councillor ABRAHAMS are you speaking?
Councillor ABRAHAMS:
Thank you, Madam Chair. I just thought some of the other councillors might
speak. Thank you.
Madam Chair, there are a number of concerns that Labor councillors have about
the proposed PaD or Planning and Development Bill. We've heard a number
from Councillor DICK. I won't restate those, though many are very important to
me, but just highlight others.
The first intent of this legislation is in fact to promote economic development. It
removes the requirement under the Sustainable Planning Act for environmentsustainable development, which balances economic social and environment, and
replaces it with lip service of balancing economic development with wellbeing.
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
- 66 Madam Chair, I believe that that change is absolutely significant, it is
ideological, it is the ideology of the Federal Government that is now—we're
seeing it in the State Government and we've already seen it in our City Plan
2014. It is economic development at any cost.
Madam Chair, why I am so concerned about that political paradigm that has
been changed within our legislation so quickly, but also because it means that
Australia is not respecting some of the existing statutory obligations that we
have, both at an international level with the UNESCO (United Nations
Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization) World Heritage Committee
and agreements that we've made there. It means we're also not respecting at a
national level the Inter-governmental agreement on environment which binds us
to a number of legislation, and nothing could show more consistently that we are
ignoring those legal obligations on the fact that environmental impact statements
are removed from this legislation.
The legislation explains that responsibility will be put under the Environment
Planning Act. Well the Environment Planning Act does not have the
responsibility for planning environment impact statements. It really relates only
to relevant environmental activities such as in workshops and pollution sources,
not a whole scale look at the impact on major environment. Madam Chair, this
is a significant change which Labor councillors do not support.
The other change is to say this is such a simple document; it's so brief and
concise and condense. Well nothing could be further from the truth. All it means
is some of the detail, the nuts and bolts, the flesh on the bones that was in the
Sustainable Planning Act will be seen in regulations when this Act is first
debated by the State Government.
Madam Chair, the devil is in the detail. It is in regulations; in regulations where
the general community finds them very difficult to find, where we have no idea
of the real impact and intent of this legislation.
The other issue that I wish to refer to is the issue that is the call in powers, and
just restate the call in powers for the minister which are very significant.
Currently they require a process where there has been a call for submission from
the community to justify the State Government interest. This has been removed.
It's called in because the minister thinks he might think it relates to a State
interest. He doesn't even have to be accurate on that. He or she just thinks it
might relate to a State interest, and then having done so he or she does not have
to get advice from anyone within the State Government. On their shoulders they
make the call that no one can appeal. It is the ultimate decision given to one
State minister.
Madam Chair, this is not a process where the community is involved in the
growth of our city, which is the basis of the legislation. After all we have a
Westminster system of legislation and inherent in the basis of that is that
everyone is equal before the law. Well do you know what this legislation does?
It doesn't even let them get before the law. They are locked out before they can
even get there, and one person completely unaccountable can make decisions.
I'm amazed that the LNP would go to the extent of the belatedness of this
legislation.
Another issue that is concerning me is the information of access to information
which is, we all know, an incredibly relevant part of legislation in development
where it changes, there is negotiation between the developer and the assessing
agent at any time.
I read from a submission: “the relegation of important provisions concerning
transparent information to simple access rules under section 224 of the Bill is
concerning. These rules are not subordinate legislation. Therefore the rules of
the community getting access to information can be changed without notice or
any public consultation.”
That means that in the flick of a finger our minister can just change our access,
with all those lovely powers he or she can walk all over local governments, can
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
- 67 just change how you and I as councillors, how our constituents can have access
to information without us being notified, without the community being notified.
Madam Chair, is that the sort of legislation that your side of the Chamber would
support? It cannot be supported in any way.
Finally, we have as we all know, code assessable, impact assessable. Impact
assessable is what the community understands clearly; that it is advertised and
they have the right to appear before the court if they do not support the
submission.
In the new changes in terms of merit, it is determined by the development
assessor whether a merit application will be advertised or not, will be notified or
not. Local council's assessors are the gatekeepers as to whether the community
knows of the development application. That means the ability of third-party
involvement in the planning scheme is at the whim of a local government
development assessor.
I would just like to read to you what has come out of the New South Wales
Independent Commission Against Corruption, which we all know was
desperately needed in New South Wales. It says very clearly “the Independent
Commission Against Corruption has identified that the public appeals are of
vital importance to a transparent and accountable planning system, and has
recommended that the scope of appeals be extended as an anti-corruption
measure.”
Madam Chair, this Bill is taking the opposite path and reducing the powers of
third party to scrutinise how we develop our city. This Council should be saying
no to this Bill.
Chairman:
Further debate? Councillor COOPER?
Councillor COOPER:
Thank you very much, Madam Chair. There were a number of comments made
from the Australian Labor Party which were fundamentally incorrect. Let's go
through these things.
Councillor DICK said I didn't say whether it was a good bad idea. I thought it
was quite clear that the Council officer who presented basically outlined the
facts of the matter. It's essentially that this was information that was provided
and there was commentary made by Council. He had six things to say; I didn't
think that there were six things that he did say that were in any way, shape or
form commentary on this. Then he said I provided a glowing endorsement of the
new Bill, so inconsistency from Councillor DICK; not really unusual.
Then we had—
Councillor Interjecting.
Chairman:
Councillor DICK.
Councillor COOPER:
—we had Councillor DICK making an assertion that I refused to release the
submission. Well actually there was two councillors, two ALP councillors,
Australian Labor Party councillors, on the committee who asked how it would
be available. That was what the discussion was in fact in committee.
Then we had another assertion—
Councillors Interjecting.
Chairman:
Order. Councillor ABRAHAMS don't yell out.
Councillor COOPER:
If she listened, Madam Chair, it might help her understand exactly what is going
on. Because then we had Councillor DICK saying that point 13 in this was
discussed at committee and said that I said—that was land owner's consent not
being required before an application is lodged—said that I said at committee
that it—and I quote—wouldn't fly.
Well in fact it was the officer present at committee, the manager of City
Planning and Economic Development, who made that comment, and he was
making an observation that he did not believe that the State Government would
proceed on that. That was made extremely clear at committee, but unfortunately
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
- 68 the two ALP councillors who sit on the committee did not provide that
information clearly to their fearless leader.
Then there was Councillor DICK's comments about ministerial powers and,
Madam Chair, I think it's important instead of the hysteria that we see from the
Australian Labor Party, let's actually look at the difference between SPA,
because there's ministerial powers that are covered under the Australian Labor
Party's Sustainable Planning Act 2009.
It talks about what a State interest is, and it says (a)—this is 424—an application
may be called in only for State interest and it defines State interest. State interest
means (a) an interest that the minister considers affects an economic or
environmental interest of the State.
Now let's compare that as to what the new proposed Bill has under 104 call in
power, so that's under the PaD Bill. It also talk about what the State interest is
and it says, State interest means an interest that the minister considers affects an
economic or environmental interest of the State or a part of the State.
So I don't see any material difference in that definition, Madam Chair, so clearly
the commentary from the Australian Labor Party is fundamentally flawed. Then
when we actually talk—and I know Councillor ABRAHAMS she's talking,
talking away there, that stream of consciousness that seems to lead her up the
garden path on a regular basis continues—and then it goes onto what an interest
is as defined.
So an interest—under the SPA (b) an interest that the minister consider affects
the interests of ensuring there is an efficient, effective and accountable planning
and development assessment system.
Let's have a look how it's defined under the proposed new Planning and
Development Bill. It actually talks about under 3, purpose of the Act: the
purpose is to be mainly achieved by providing for an efficient—we've heard that
word before because it was in SPA—effective—again, that word was in SPA—
it says transparent, so transparent wasn't in SPA. It says integrated, also not in
SPA, and it says accountable system for planning and development assessment
systems.
So I don't see that the addition of two words, transparent and integrated,
suggests that there's any more ability for the minister to take action, because
under SPA, Madam Chair, as you know very well, there were huge opportunities
for the minister to step in on a development application at any time.
We actually saw the previous State government who did step in—they stepped
in on the application at Milton for that site right by the rail station. They came in
and then they withdrew 100 car parks from that application. They also came in
on an application at Petrie Barracks. There was a decision made by the former
State government to come, step in and override Council's powers.
Unfortunately Councillor WYNDHAM's not in the Chamber, but Remick Street
bushland, Madam Chair, the previous State government chose to step in against
Council's will and they approved an application over that land, that land that we
think should have been retained for environmental purposes.
So, Madam Chair—
Councillor Interjecting.
Chairman:
Councillor ABRAHAMS.
Councillor COOPER:
Madam Chair, it is clear that these powers exist and have existed under the
previous state Labor government. This proposed Bill makes it clear as to what
the minister's powers should be.
I note that there's all sorts of confected outrage from the Australian Labor Party,
but who was it who got up in this Chamber who has wholeheartedly endorsed
the ULDA (Urban Land Development Authority)? There is no appeal rights
under the ULDA. There is no submission process under ULDA. In fact it was
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
- 69 Councillor ABRAHAMS who supported 40 storeys that was proposed at
Woolloongabba.
So they stand for nothing because when you look at the facts of the matter there
is nothing to their argument, it is fundamentally flawed, and they were the ones
that supported the most absolutely disgraceful planning system that was ever
brought to this state, the ULDA, where there is no ability for anyone. No
council, no person, no one has any legal right to contest a decision made under
those provisions.
Did they stand up in this Chamber and decry those provisions? No they did not.
In fact they were endorsed by Councillor ABRAHAMS, the shadow planning
chair in this Council Chamber. So shame on you for not standing up for the
people of this city, because when you had your opportunity you did not. You
have absolutely no legitimacy to any of your arguments there this afternoon but,
Madam Chair, that's not unusual and it's totally disappointing to see this
nonsense put forward by the Australian Labour Party. Thank you very much.
Chairman:
I will put the motion.
Upon being submitted to the Chamber by the Chairman, the motion for the adoption of the report of the
Neighbourhood Planning and Development Assessment Committee was declared carried on the voices.
The report as follows
ATTENDANCE:
Councillor Amanda Cooper (Chairman), and Councillors Helen Abrahams, Geraldine Knapp,
Shayne Sutton and Andrew Wines.
LEAVE OF ABSENCE:
Councillor Vicki Howard (Deputy Chairman)
A
COMMITTEE PRESENTATION – PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BILL
235/2014-15
1.
Marcus Mulholland, Principal Strategic Planning, Strategic Planning, City Planning and
Economic Development, City Planning and Sustainability Division, attended the meeting to
provide an update on the Planning and Development Bill. He provided the information below.
2.
The planning reform context was explained. The Planning and Development Bill (PaD) is one
element of broader planning reform. The four streams of the planning reform are:
legislation
plan making
development assessment
information and communications technology (ICT).
3.
Other reforms include the following completed elements:
Single State Planning Policy
State Assessment and Referral Agency (SARA)
State Development Assessment Provisions (SDAP)
Infrastructure Charges reform.
4.
The purpose of the new legislation is to facilitate the prosperity of Queensland by giving
effect to a planning system that balances community wellbeing, economic growth and
environmental protection. PaD is proposed to replace the Sustainable Planning Act 2009
(SPA)
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
- 70 -
5.
The intention of the new legislation is that Councils will have the confidence, capability and
discretion to better plan for their communities in the context of state priorities and
development proponents will have greater certainty regarding outcomes. There will be ‘whole
of government’ facilitation of appropriate development. The community will have confidence
that the planning system promotes and protects their interests. (Information Paper on the
Consultation Draft, DSDIP 2014).
6.
The draft Bill recasts many aspects of current arrangements to remove processes that are
better suited to other places, such as in the regulation or subsidiary instruments or guidance.
This frees the legislation of unnecessary detail, which assists its clarity and enables these
processes to be more easily adapted to changing circumstances when the need arises.
7.
The draft Bill recasts many aspects of current arrangements to consolidate the development
related definitions to a single dictionary to avoid the time consuming process of searching
different parts of the legislation. It will also remove instructional provisions from the
legislation and include simplified chapter outlines to overcome some of the impediments to
easy navigation. (Information Paper on the Consultation Draft, DSDIP 2014).
8.
The key concepts of PaD include:
repealing SPA. PaD is new, not like SPA (2009) which was a revised IPA (1997) that
continued similar issues
integrated system where local, regional and state matters are considered
process and detail is moved down or out of the regulatory framework which is less
prescriptive
the purpose statement includes prosperity, the achievement of which entails the
balancing of community wellbeing, economic growth and environmental protection.
9.
The key differences when comparing PaD and SPA include:
PaD is significantly shorter
there are fewer state planning instruments under PaD
State Planning Policy (SPP) is primary policy direction, regional plans then local
government planning schemes
the development assessment system is detailed outside of PaD proposed regulation
there are new types and levels of assessment
the transitional provisions are much shorter and simpler
Planning and Environment Court provisions are proposed under a separate Bill
local governments are making planning schemes
State provisions sit over local government provisions
infrastructure designations
development applications
development application referrals
dispute resolution and compensation
infrastructure planning and charging.
10.
However, the details of the processes and provisions are different.
11.
Other legislation and regulation include the Planning and Environment Court Bill, PaD
regulation, repeal of State Planning Regulatory Provision’s (SPRP) (SPA instruments), and
cessation of Statutory Guidelines (SPA guidelines).
12.
PaD is significantly shorter, with a focus on system, outcomes expressed on SPP, regional
plans and local government planning schemes, system principles/heads of power in PaD,
details and operation of system if PaD regulation, and Planning and Environment Court
provisions under different legislation.
13.
The development assessment system is detailed outside of PaD proposed regulation and
includes:
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
- 71 -
-
PaD chapter three provides for the development assessment
PaD regulation parts three, four and five contains the development assessment rules
including provisions about information requests and notification procedures
the integrated system is still provided for
referrals are still provided for
conditioning approvals are still provided for
deemed approval and deemed refusal are still provided for
there is an alternative assessment manager option provided for
there is a limited exemption certificates option for local government to issue
landowner’s consent is no longer required to make an application.
14.
The new types and levels of assessment for PaD include:
categories of assessment (not SPA levels of assessment)
PaD categories are accepted, standard, merit and prohibited
the term accepted is similar to exempt and self-assessable
the term ‘standard’ is similar to compliance and simple code assessment
the term ‘merit’ is similar to complex code and impact assessment
the merit is assessed more like performance based assessment under SPA
while self-assessable is not a category, the new category called ‘accepted’ is
anticipated to operate in the same way.
15.
The transitional provisions are much shorter and simpler. The SPA transitional provisions
were 123 pages long compared to the PaD transitional provisions being 17 pages long. The
transitional provisions provides for clear conversion of SPA levels if assessment to PaD
assessment categories. PaD is exempt and self-assessable to ‘accepted’, compliance and code
to ‘standard’, impact to ‘merit with notification’. PaD provides for a shortcut for local
government to amend its assessment categories for up to one year.
16.
The Planning and Environment Court provisions proposed under a separate Bill removes
court processes and rules from planning legislation, enables legal sector changes without
needing change to planning sector legislation and is combined with moving building tribunal
matters.
17.
The status of PaD was explained as a consultation draft with the intention of being a living
document. The consultation draft of the Planning and Development Bill 2014 is a working
document. It will remain a working document as it proceeds through the preparation and
refinement process over the coming months. (Information Paper on the Consultation Draft,
DSDIP 2014).
18.
Following a number of questions from the Committee, the Chairman thanked Mr Mulholland
for his informative presentation.
19.
RECOMMENDATION:
THAT COUNCIL NOTE THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE ABOVE
REPORT.
ADOPTED
ENVIRONMENT, PARKS AND SUSTAINABILITY COMMITTEE
Councillor Matthew BOURKE, Chairman of the Environment, Parks and Sustainability Committee, moved,
seconded by Councillor Ryan MURPHY, that the report of the meeting of that Committee held on 28 October
2014, be adopted.
Chairman:
Is there any debate?
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
- 72 Councillor BOURKE:
Look, Madam Chairman, just very quickly before I get to the formal committee
report that's before us, just two items. I haven't had the chance in the Council
Chamber to commend the team for the Green Heart Fair which was held out at
Carindale three weekends ago. Some 15,000 residents turned up on the day to
partake in the activities, to learn more about how they can be sustainable at
home and to look at some of the products.
Some of the store holders were there and also the Council displays, as well as
the many other community groups that were involved. Another great day, and
that combined with our fair that we have out at Chermside seasonally, over
30,000 residents who have attended those two events obviously engaging in
sustainability, engaging what Council does to make the city a more sustainable
place.
We handed out over 2,000 plants to residents as well as part of our free-plant
program, as well as a number of other giveaways and activities.
Also I just want to mention very quickly—and I know all councillors will be
aware of this and I hope that they're encouraging and talking to their local
community groups—the LORD MAYOR's Sustainability and Environmental
Grants programs has been launched and applications are closing on 24
November.
Madam Chair, once again there's four categories for people to apply for grants
as part of the LORD MAYOR's environment and sustainability grants program.
There's the Sustainability Grants, the Environmental Grants, the Native Wildlife
Carer Grants, and the Cultivating Community Gardens Grants.
All very good programs that provide much needed assistance to our local
community groups engaged in the environmental and sustainability work right
across the city. I'd encourage all councillors to make sure that their community
groups are aware of those. I know that the team and lifestyles are doing a lot at
the moment in trying to connect with all of those groups and make sure they're
aware so that everyone can apply. Madam Chair, I look forward to seeing some
of the money out on the ground delivering great projects across the city.
Turning to the report, two items on the report before us. The first item was a
presentation on the stormwater harvesting project out at Whites Hill. This has
been quite a complicated project. It is a former landfill site and it has a heavy
usage for community and sports uses as well.
The project obviously is funded by the Australian Federal Government through
a $5.39 million grant and that money is for all the sites across the city not just
for this site I should say. But obviously we had to do some remediation work to
the site as part of this project which worked in parallel.
I just want to say a very big thank you to all the Council officers who have
worked on this project. It was complex, it was difficult and managing
stakeholders was also very difficult as well because it is such a highly-used
space.
The good thing is that over 185 megalitres of water a year is going to be able to
be provided to local sporting groups to help water and maintain their fields; help
reduce their costs, help maintain their fields to a better level. That's got to be a
good outcome for the residents, a good outcome for the community, and on top
of that, the environmental benefits of being able to capture and treat that
stormwater before it makes its way into our waterways is another benefit to the
environment.
Turning to the petition, Madam Chairman, there was a petition from residents in
Deagon Ward, and no doubt Councillor NEWTON will stand up to talk about
this. It's about a small dog-off-leash area and I know that Councillor NEWTON
has indicated that she's happy to provide funding for that through her Ward
Footpath and Parks Trust Fund.
Chairman:
Further debate? Councillor NEWTON?
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
- 73 Councillor NEWTON:
Yes, Madam Chair, I'll just speak briefly on item B. As Councillor BOURKE
mentioned, it's in relation to a series of petitions that were lodged, both paper
and electronic, with Brisbane City Council in support of a small dog-off-leash
area or a dog-off-leash area for small dogs and puppies.
As a local councillor which enjoys a very high level of dog ownership in the
ward, I'm finding an increasing request from dog owners for a smaller space
adjoining existing off-leash areas so that their dogs perhaps like their puppies
can get used to using the dog-off-leash areas and find the bigger ones a little bit
overwhelming, particularly when there's dogs that are very familiar with that
particular site.
I've put a few small dog-off-leash areas in local parks, most recently one at
Boondall Park, so I'm pleased to be supporting the petition today for one at
Curlew Park at Sandgate, which is a very popular one.
I'd like to commend and congratulate the head petitioner, Gloria McClymont
who's very passionate about supporting dog owners. She's a very passionate dog
owner who's keen on promoting adoption of dogs as well which is really
exciting to see. So given that Curlew Park is a very popular spot, I've got no
doubt this'll have great use.
We're all champing at the bit. We're very excited to see this coming through
Council. I've already signed off on the parks trust fund. Indeed on 27 August
this year I signed off on the parks trust fund money. So the paperwork's done,
the Council officers are ready to roll, so with this finally coming through
Council today—and I expect it will receive the full support of Council—that
we'll be able to get on and get this happening for the dog owners in Deagon
Ward.
Chairman:
Further debate? Councillor BOURKE? Okay, I'll put the motion.
Upon being submitted to the Chamber by the Chairman, the motion for the adoption of the report of the
Environment, Parks and Sustainability Committee was declared carried on the voices.
The report as follows
ATTENDANCE:
Councillor Fiona King (Deputy Chairman), and Councillors Peter Cumming, Geraldine Knapp and
Ryan Murphy.
LEAVE OF ABSENCE:
Councillor Matthew Bourke (Chairman) and Councillor Kim Flesser.
A
COMMITTEE PRESENTATION –
PROJECT WHITES HILL RESERVE
STORMWATER
HARVESTING
236/2014-15
1.
Lee Garnett, Project Manager, Civic and Building, Project Management, City Projects Office,
Brisbane Infrastructure, attended the meeting to provide an update on Stormwater Harvesting
Whites Hill. Ms Garnett provided the information below.
2.
Stormwater harvesting is diverting of stormwater runoff and storage, storage to hold water for
later use, for example on sports fields and at bowls clubs.
3.
It was explained that there are three types of stormwater harvesting schemes which include
open water body, stormwater diversion into above ground tanks and in-channel storage.
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
- 74 -
4.
The background of the project was explained. The project received a grant from the
Australian Government for $5.39 million and uses the WaterSmart strategy. It is part of the
Norman Park 2012-2031 plan and the Landfill remediation program.
5.
The benefits of the project include reducing demand for potable water by 185 mega litres per
year, water bill savings for community clubs, increasing amenity of open space, creation of
habitat and improved waterway health.
6.
A slide detailing the site locations was shown.
7.
An aerial map showing the site location, Whites Hill Reserve, was displayed. The presenter
explained where the water runs off and the catchment.
8.
There are existing plans for the upgrade of the Whites Hill Reserve car park and emergency
waste disposal access track.
9.
There is an opportunity to align the schedule and budget with stormwater harvesting.
10.
The landfill remediation construction team ran both projects in parallel.
11.
The presenter mentioned that the decision to use the services of the Field Services Group was
because of the experience of the staff in this area and their ability to be flexible with delivery
compared to an external contractor of the staff.
12.
Site images prior and during construction were shown.
13.
Challenges of the particular sites were discussed and images of some of these challenges were
shown.
14.
Images of the site after construction were shown along with a sneak preview of the other five
sites to be delivered this financial year.
15.
Following a number of questions from the Committee, the Chairman thanked Ms Garnett for
her informative presentation.
16.
RECOMMENDATION:
THAT COUNCIL NOTE THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE ABOVE
REPORT.
ADOPTED
B
PETITION – REQUESTING THAT COUNCIL PROVIDE A SMALL DOG
OFF-LEASH AREA AT CURLEW PARK, SANDGATE
CA14/620790
237/2014-15
17.
Council received three petitions from residents of Deagon, requesting Council provide a small
dog off-leash area at Curlew Park, Sandgate. Two petitions (CA14/620790 and
CA14/646329) were presented and received at the Council meeting held on 29 July 2014, by
Councillor Victoria Newton. The other petition (CA14/644021) was received during Winter
Recess 2014.
18.
The Acting Executive Manager, Field Services Group, Brisbane Infrastructure, supplied the
following information.
19.
The petitions contain a total of 145 signatures.
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
- 75 -
20.
Curlew Park currently has an existing medium size dog off-leash area with a shelter, seating
and taps. The existing dog off-leash area is well used by dog owners.
21.
Asset Services have investigated the request and sought quotations for a small dog off-leash
area at Curlew Park. The cost for this facility is $26,000.00, including fencing, seating, shade
tree planting, signage and a tap.
22.
There has been an agreement by Councillor Victoria Newton that this project will be included
as a parks improvement project under Schedule 43 Ward Footpath and Parks Trust Fund
2014/15.
23.
The project will be delivered once the Ward Footpath and Parks Trust Fund approval process
has been completed.
Funding
24.
Funding for the small dog off-leash area will need to be sought from Schedule 43 - Deagon
Ward Footpath/Parks Trust Fund 2014-15 financial year.
Consultation
25.
Councillor Victoria Newton, Councillor for Deagon Ward, has been consulted and supports
the recommendation.
Customer impact
26.
Providing a small dog off-leash area would be of benefit to dog owners with smaller and
timid breeds of dogs.
27.
Accordingly, the Acting Executive Manager therefore recommends as follows and the
Committee agrees.
28.
RECOMMENDATION:
THAT THE PETITIONERS BE ADVISED THAT COUNCIL OFFICERS HAVE
INVESTIGATED THEIR REQUEST TO PROVIDE A SMALL DOG OFF-LEASH
AREA AT CURLEW PARK, SANDGATE.
ADOPTED
FIELD SERVICES COMMITTEE
Councillor David McLACHLAN, Chairman of the Field Services Committee, moved, seconded by Councillor
Kim MARX, that the report of that Committee held on 28 October 2014, be adopted.
Chairman:
Is there any debate?
Councillor McLACHLAN:
Oh thank you, Madam Chairman. Before I move to the report before us at item
A, I'd just like to reiterate to all councillors present that the new Brisbane bin
app is now live, available at a friendly app store near you. Go to your app store,
search for Brisbane bin app and you'll be able to load it fairly quickly, and I
hope that all councillors take heed of the information that's been provided to
their ward officers, to provide this in turn to their residents, either by newsletter
or by other encouragement to get involved in this app which means that it takes
away the uncertainty that residents may have about which day is their recycling
day or their green bin day in particular. But it also has the opportunity to provide
them with reminders just to be sure.
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
- 76 On their way home there is now no excuse for not knowing precisely when your
bin day is and the Brisbane bin app is a great innovation provided by Waste and
Resource Recovery Services.
Madam Chair, the item before us item A, this was a fairly comprehensive report
as you can see from the length of the report. It was probably one of the longer
reports we've seen coming through the Field Services Committee in recent
times. It was the report from Mike Muller, the Senior Entomologist with our
Mosquito Management in Asset Services Branch, following a three day
conference that he attended on behalf of the Council in Western Australia
recently at the Mosquito Control Association of Australia Conference which
was a very important conference.
It attracted participants from all around the world, experts in their field, and all
with one objective and that is to reduce the issues related to mosquitoes all
around the world. I think the one thing that came through very clearly is that
whatever the location the issues remain the same.
The way to deal with this is through science. Science is the key to overcoming
the problems of mosquitoes. To follow a science-based approach is what clearly
came out of this three day agenda, and I think there are some points of optimism
there in terms of hoping to control mosquitoes around the world.
There's a bacteria in particular that's of interest that might help out in those
nations particularly that are affected by dengue and that's very encouraging. It
also proved I think that the approach that is being taken by Brisbane City
Council remains at world's best practice.
I think one of the reasons for attending these conferences is to see if there are
any alternatives to the approaches being taken, and I think again the attendance
at this conference and the results from it have provided that we continue to be at
the leading edge of world's best practice in terms of mosquito control. The work
of the mosquito control unit of Council is to be commended. Thank you, Madam
Chairman.
Chairman:
Further debate? I will put the motion.
Upon being submitted to the Chamber, the motion for the adoption of the report of the Field Services Committee
was declared carried on the voices.
The report read as follows
ATTENDANCE:
Councillor David McLachlan (Chairman), Councillor Norm Wyndham (Deputy Chairman), and
Councillors Peter Cumming, Nicole Johnston, Kim Marx and Ian McKenzie.
A
COMMITTEE PRESENTATION – MOSQUITO CONFERENCE REPORT
238/2014-15
1.
Mike Muller, Senior Entomologist, Mosquito Management, Asset Services Branch,
Field Services Group, Brisbane Infrastructure Division, attended the meeting to provide an
update on the Mosquito Control Association of Australia (MCAA) conference. He provided
the information below.
2.
An overview of mosquitoes and mosquito-borne disease in Western Australia (WA) was
provided on the presentation displayed.
3.
In WA the mediterranean climate of wet winter and hot, dry summer means quite different
seasonal patterns for Ross River virus and Barmah Forest virus in comparison with eastern
States. The peak activity is during spring and early summer.
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
- 77 -
4.
In south-west WA there are two saltmarsh mosquito species of concern: the Southern
Saltmarsh mosquito is the main carrier of Ross River virus and the Common Saltmarsh
mosquito. In the north during the wet season floodwater mosquitoes can reach plague
numbers.
5.
WA also has to manage occasional activity of Murray Valley Encephalitis virus and Kunjin
virus in the north of the State in the monsoon season.
6.
Their control programs use the same products which are used in South East Queensland.
7.
New control strategies include the Eliminate Dengue program, which includes the use of a
bacteria called Wolbachia to interrupt the transmission of Dengue virus by Aedes aegypti
mosquitoes (the carrier of yellow fever) in north Queensland, Vietnam, Indonesia and Brazil.
The Gates Foundation funded this project.
8.
The new control strategies also used the examination of native Australian mosquito species
for local Wolbachia.
9.
Metofluthrin emanators are a spatial repellent, which in early trials proved to be promising for
use in domestic situations against dengue mosquitoes. The presenter asked if this could be
useful where biting midges come indoors as a new control strategy.
10.
There is a possible new mosquito control product called Natular, which has an active
ingredient called spinosad and is produced by a soil bacteria in the fermentation process. The
product interferes with larvae nerve impulses after ingestion and absorption. This product is
already in use in the United States of America and currently under assessment by Australian
Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority (APVMA) for registration in Australia. It is
potentially very useful with a different mode of action from current products.
11.
It was learnt through information from the presentations seen in Florida and mid-west
United States of America that they have to deal with Aedes aegypti and Asian Tiger
mosquito, Aedes albopictus. In the Saltmarshes in Florida, the use of impoundment locks up
whole areas to prevent water movement during summer. The topography is very flat and there
are no mangroves. It is more adulticiding than in Australia.
12.
A paper prepared by Pat Dale, Griffith University, mentions that a review of sites that have
been runnelled in Southeast Queensland is about to be conducted. There is no new
information available and the report is due in June 2015. Good data from the existing sites
will be required.
13.
Papers from WA demonstrate the long-distance dispersal capacity of mosquitoes to invade
urban development confirming what has been observed in South East Queensland.
14.
Models showing high probability that possums play an important role in the urban Ross River
virus cycle.
15.
Joe Conlon, Technical Advisor, American Mosquito Control Association (AMCA) gave an
overview at the conference of what happens in the United States of America in regards to
managing mosquitoes, from control to communication. The United States of America has
734 districts with district budgets ranging from $50,000 to $38 million. Nationally the budget
is $650 million. There are videos available on the American Mosquito Control Association
(AMCA) website that show the impact on people and families. There are problems with
activist groups who are opposed to mosquito control.
16.
The presenter gave an overview of the programs in Townsville and the Gold Coast. He
presented at the MCAA conference on the management of the Helicopter Loading Zone and
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
- 78 -
product storage to meet the Work Health and Safety and Transport Operations Road Use
Management (TORUM) Transport requirements.
17.
Pictures were shown of the Bti product which is delivered in 200 litre drums and then
transferred into 1300 litre Intermediate Bulk Containers (IBC) for storage in a bunded
shipping container and also secure transport into the field.
18.
Professor Dina Fonseca, Rutgers University, New Jersey presented on the Asian Tiger
mosquito. Aedes albopictus is an aggressive worldwide invasive species and a vector of
Dengue and Chikungunya viruses. This is a container-breeding and peri-domestic species. It
is a severe pest species that will change people’s leisure behaviour. Asian Tiger mosquito is
present in the Torres Strait. This species is very adaptable and could spread all the way to
Victoria. There have been recent incursions into Australian airports. Molecular tests are being
developed to determine the origins of Asian Tiger mosquito and Aedes aegypti.
Deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) finger-printing of large water containers is being done to detect
mosquito species in them. Asian Tiger mosquito can carry Ross River virus. A model used by
Queensland Institute of Medical Research (QIMR) shows that the costs associated with a
single detection of Asian Tiger mosquito in Brisbane could be $1.13 million, but the benefit
cost ratio is 2,400:1. If it is established it will cost $2.5 million annually to manage as a
disease vector. There were 83 imported cases of Chikungunya and Zika viruses in Brisbane in
2013 (returning travellers).
19.
There were 18 short presentations delivered, including one from Mike Muller. The topics
ranged from an extendable camera to check guttering and tank tops to Ross River virus in
kangaroos in south-west WA indicating an important virus reservoir. Mike Muller’s papers
were presented on Oviposition behaviour of Toxorhynchites mosquitoes and Mosquitoes
feeding on reptiles and amphibians.
20.
Photos depicting the use of Fast Technology for Analysis (FTA) cards to detect mosquitoborne viruses were shown. There is great potential as an early warning tool for virus activity.
Representatives from all states discussed protocols required to standardise diagnostic
techniques and reagents.
21.
Take home points from the conference were:
For general mosquito control, we continue to use the best available products and
techniques.
The new product Natular may be a useful addition to the program if it gains
registration with Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority
(APVMA) though the price and application rate will have to be considered.
Molecular technology continues to develop tools that will assist with rapid
identification of mosquito species and mosquito-borne viruses.
The mosquito management community considers it highly likely that Asian Tiger
Mosquito will eventually establish in Australia. When that happens, there will be a
major shift in mosquito pest problems as it is a vicious day-biting species that will
require a different approach to control.
It is also a potential vector of Dengue and Chikungunya viruses.
22.
With regard to preparation for the Asian Tiger Mosquito, and also the possibility that Aedes
aegypti might return to South East Queensland, Brisbane City Council activities include
surveys for container-breeding mosquitoes in collaboration with Queensland Health and
QIMR. Different trap types are being assessed for efficiency.
23.
Council is providing mosquitoes from our routine monitoring traps to a PhD student at QIMR
who is searching for native Wolbachia bacteria in native mosquitoes.
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
- 79 -
24.
Council is harvesting eggs of native container-breeding species for use by molecular
biologists at QIMR and Queensland Health to develop DNA fingerprints that can identify
eggs and larvae of exotic species.
25.
The presentation included photographs of traps, the harvesting of back-yard mosquito eggs
and an image of the technology for counting which is called Ovistrip egg counting.
26.
Photos were also shown from the Starycide (triflumuron) weathering trial.
27.
Following a number of questions from the Committee, the Chairman thanked Mr Muller for
his informative presentation.
28.
RECOMMENDATION:
THAT COUNCIL NOTE THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE ABOVE
REPORT.
ADOPTED
BRISBANE LIFESTYLE COMMITTEE
Councillor Krista ADAMS, Chairman of the Brisbane Lifestyle Committee, moved, seconded by Councillor
Andrew WINES, that the report of that Committee held on 28 October 2014, be adopted.
Chairman:
Is there any debate?
Councillor ADAMS:
Thank you, Madam Chair. Yes, just a couple of items I'd like to bring to the
attention of the Chambers before we actually get to the report that we had last
week.
First of all I just wanted to bring to attention obviously the business hotline
133BNE continues to grow in popularity. I know that Councillor SIMMONDS
does a lot of promotion of this too through business in Brisbane, but over the
last two years we have seen more than 65,000 responses provided to business
inquiries that have come through on 133BNE.
So we really are providing a one-stop-shop to our business owners. We are
averaging 2,700 calls each month at the moment. They are commonly around
the cafes and restaurants, but there's many other questions as well to make sure
that we are definitely supplying the support that is needed for people in Brisbane
to get into business and make our whole economy thriving, from the smallest
business to the largest businesses as well.
I remind everyone that our not-for-profit groups particularly that the latest
rounds of healthy and physical activity grants are out. Councillor BOURKE
mentioned before we are trying to promote this greatly through all the grants
programs that are out at the moment, but in particular I really would like to see
people making sure that they are talking to their local groups that they're aware
of the opportunities they have to get involved in these grants to make sure that
we can improve the healthy and active programs that we have by having our
private and our community groups come together and support us as well.
Also Councillor SCHRINNER is very excited to announce with me that we are
having the invitation out to all community and sporting groups at the moment to
register their interest for our large green space that we have recently been gifted
at the Whites Hill College I should say.
So Whites Hill College was gifted to Council from the State Government. It is
not used very much by the college and they recognise that as well. The fantastic
opportunities we have now is two full sized football fields with a compound area
that has two building that are detached from the school grounds. It is really a
great opportunity for any of the local sporting groups or community groups that
think they may be able to utilise this site, whether it's to hold meetings or train
or have events on one-off occasions.
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
- 80 Anything that may be related to sport and rec or the community groups, we
would love people to get in contact with us, either through the call centre or the
Chandler Ward office or they can contact me and let us know if they are
interested in being involved or interested in getting into this site, because it is a
fantastic opportunity for the Chandler Ward. I know that Councillor
SCHRINNER is very excited about the opportunities that we may have there as
well. Contain yourself, he will contain himself.
I'd also like to just very quickly recognise—I know Councillor ABRAHAMS
was with us the other day as well—Spinal Injuries Australia held their Brisbane
Inclusive Community Championships and they did recognise the much hard
work that we do right across Council when it comes to our access and inclusion
programs which really are not above and beyond anymore when they come to
our working Council. They are business as usual when we're looking at access
and inclusion.
So our highly commended government departments include the Grange Library,
the Coopers Plains Library, the CityCat fleet—Councillor MATIC thank you
very much for the work that you're doing around there. Councillor BOURKE's
area, the Whites Hill Reserve and the City Botanic Gardens all-ability
playgrounds as well.
We've also got our video that Councillor MATIC and my guys worked together
towards an accessible and inclusive Brisbane video which is a great way to
promote all the work that we do in Brisbane City Council.
The best sporting venue, Councillor HOWARD, was Centenary Pool, of course,
of course, because not only is it a fantastic venue, but the opportunities and the
ability to retro-fit in a heritage site is very, very important.
Of course I think the piece de resistance which was collected on behalf of the
LORD MAYOR by Councillor KNAPP was the best individual in delivering
access and inclusion which went to LORD MAYOR Graham Quirk. So I think
that is a great reflection of the hard work that this administration has put into,
and particularly LORD MAYOR Graham Quirk since he has come into the role
as LORD MAYOR, and the dedication into access and inclusion in the work
that we do right throughout Brisbane City Council.
One part of that was in our committee report last week, Madam Chair, which
was on the Hoarding and Squalor Reduction Initiative. We gave the committee
an update on how we were going with our resident liaison officer in working in
this space.
We do know that squalor and compulsive hoarding are extremely complex and
challenging issues, and we are engaging with a number of our residents
throughout Brisbane through a range of activities. Obviously in the extreme
cases we do have regulatory responsibilities around the Public Health Act, but
we also know that there is significant health risks and trying to balance that with
the broader community and the concerns for the wellbeing of the affected
residents and local residents as well.
So not only is there an enforcement aspect to this, but there is also negotiations
and counselling and support that is needed by officers and community groups
other than Council ourselves to make sure that we are supporting the resident in
this case.
What we are trying to respond to with our Resident Liaison Officer (RLO) is
really looking at the increasing number of these vulnerable residents and looking
at a whole of Council approach, and looking at a very holistic approach when it
comes to all our other communities in this space as well.
In particular, we've got some assessment tools that are used to identify
appropriate residents and the support services that they need. The RLO will
provide the outreach and the engagement that we need to step through the
compliance and regulatory processes, but in parallel, make sure that we are
working on the social wellbeing as well for this case.
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
- 81 The public space liaison officers have a very similar role to what our resident
liaison officers can do, so the way that we respond to homelessness and rough
sleeping is also a holistic approach. It is something that is not new to Council,
but is in a different area to what we usually work in.
Over the past year we've seen some substantial investments in our
understandings of this issue, and Council are very proud to continue our work
within the community sector to really make sure we are supporting those
individuals that are experiencing hoarding and squalor in our community. Thank
you, Madam Chair.
Chairman:
Further debate? I will put the motion.
Upon being submitted to the Chamber by the Chairman, the motion for the adoption of the report of the
Brisbane Lifestyle Committee was declared carried on the voices.
The report read as follows
ATTENDANCE:
Councillor Krista Adams (Chairman), Councillor Andrew Wines (Deputy Chairman), and Councillors
Steve Griffiths, Steven Huang and Victoria Newton.
LEAVE OF ABSENCE:
Councillor Vicki Howard
A
COMMITTEE PRESENTATION
REDUCTION INITIATIVE
–
HOARDING
AND
SQUALOR
239/2014-15
1.
Vanessa Fabre, Manger Inclusive Communities, Inclusive Communities, Connected
Communities, Brisbane Lifestyle, attended the meeting to provide an update on the Hoarding
and Squalor Reduction Initiative. She provided the information below.
2.
Council has allocated funding in Program four of the 2014-15 Council budget. This initiative
demonstrates Council’s commitment to more effective and sustainable responses in
implementing a best practice compliance and support approach when working with residents
experiencing hoarding and squalor.
3.
Hoarding and squalor is a complex issue. The most affected residents:
have limited insight into their conditions;
are highly resistant to intervention;
experience other mental health issues;
are at risk of homelessness;
have poor physical health;
are socially isolated; and
experience conflict with neighbours.
4.
Council identifies vulnerable residents experiencing hoarding and squalor through various
areas of Council including:
Compliance and Regulatory Services (CARS);
neighbourhood complaints; and
ward office referrals.
5.
Council is involved with hoarding and squalor issues as
Council has regulatory responsibilities under various legislation, for example the
Public Health Act 2005;
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
- 82 -
-
Council balances broader public health risks with the wellbeing of the affected
resident;
cases are complex and challenging to manage;
cases that Council is required to manage are the most extreme and difficult; and
enforcement action is always the last resort.
6.
The Hoarding and Squalor Initiative seeks to respond to the increasing number of vulnerable
residents identified by Council through Public Health Orders and or complaints, that arise as a
result of severe domestic squalor and compulsive hoarding. The initiative promotes:
innovation providing ‘wrap around’ (holistic) support to residents experiencing
compulsive hoarding and severe domestic squalor;
two-year implementation under Program 4 Social Inclusion;
initiative is based on best practice;
compliance and support model is a ‘One Council’ approach;
targets residents of Brisbane who are identified as experiencing hoarding and squalor
and referred internally through CARS; and
use of assessment tools to identify residents’ needs, barriers to wellbeing and healthy
functioning.
7.
Details of the initiative scope were provided and included:
implementation from July 2014 to 30 June 2016;
one full time equivalent – Resident Liaison Officer (RLO);
internal Council referrals; and
RLO to provide outreach and engagement, in parallel to Compliance and Regulatory
processes, offering practical support to meet regulatory requirements.
8.
The identification process of the Hoarding and Squalor Reduction Initiative was provided and
included the following information:
CARS – internal referral;
revenue management – support pathways, addressing rates arrears/ payment plans;
Council’s Connected Communities coordinate responses, provide effective linkages
to services and resident engagement;
proactive approach to issues with key stakeholders; and
coordinated and integrated compliance/support partnership approach.
9.
Details of the support approach of the initiative and the RLO support were detailed:
conduct resident needs assessments;
use the Clutter Image Scale and the Environmental Cleanliness and Clutter Scale
assessment;
develop Resident Recovery Action Plans;
Provide referrals to support services to assist in the resident’s recovery; and
facilitate case conferencing internally and externally.
10.
In 2011-12 and 2013-14, Council funded the Severe Domestic Squalor and Compulsive
Hoarding Pilot project. The pilot project included:
Centacare specialist cleaning service provided cleaning and referral to support
services;
properties that received Public Health Orders;
evaluation and key learnings from the pilot have informed the Hoarding and Squalor
initiative;
the pilot was recognised as a priority by the Brisbane Hoarding and Squalor Working
Group and Homelessness Community Action Plan; and
new services in Brisbane have been funded to support the sector.
11.
The initiative has been initiated to achieve a range of outcomes for Council, residents, the
wider community and service providers including:
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
- 83 -
-
Council alleviates or minimises impacts of hoarding and squalor and reduces costs
associated with lengthy compliance processes;
residents experiencing squalor and hoarding have improved household functioning
and achieve improved health and wellbeing;
communities, neighbourhoods and neighbours experience improved social cohesion
and quality of life; and
service/networks respond in a strategic, coordinated and effective way to respond to
the needs of residents experiencing squalor and hoarding.
8.
Following a number of questions from the Committee, the Chairman thanked Ms Fabre for
her informative presentation.
9.
RECOMMENDATION:
THAT COUNCIL NOTE THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE ABOVE
REPORT.
ADOPTED
FINANCE, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE
Councillor Julian SIMMONDS, Chairman of the Finance, Economic Development and Administration
Committee, moved, seconded by Councillor Angela OWEN-TAYLOR, that the report of that Committee held
on 28 October 2014, be adopted.
Chairman:
Is there any debate?
Councillor SIMMONDS:
Thank you very much, Madam Chairman, just a couple of portfolio updates
firstly.
Council had a very successful ICT industry engagement event last Friday which
I had the pleasure of speaking at. We had over 400 in the room which were a
combination of small, medium and large businesses within the ICT sector. We
were able to give them an update on what we have done in the past 12 months
and what we're doing in the coming 12 months, and I greatly appreciated the
opportunity to talk directly with those businesses about Council's ICT policy.
I also had the opportunity to inspect progress on the current Queen Street Mall
work last week. It is all going along very well, all to schedule, and we look
forward to the opening up of that new Jimmy's, the new revitalised Jimmy's. The
next extra space has been provided on the mall through the removal of the old
Jimmy's, and of course our brand new Visitor Information Centre within the
Regent Theatre, which when I went through, still had a bit of fit out to go, but
they'd done a whole lot of cleaning on it and boy did it look spectacular.
So I guess I just wanted to take this opportunity before all the announcements
take place, and that work completing in the lead up and we get lost in the lead
up to G20, to thank very much all the traders on the mall for their patience
throughout that process.
I think once those hoardings come down the traders and Brisbane residents alike
who visit the mall will see the incredible benefit that's been garnered, and again
that occurred all at no cost to ratepayers. So congratulations for that project and
thank you again very much to those people for their patience.
The committee had a presentation on Exercise Tempest which was very
informative in the lead up to the storm season, so this is their disaster
management exercise that they hold yearly. There was of course some learnings
out of it which is why we hold these exercises, but for the most part, the old
ECC that we all know and love is working very well and is very much prepared
to step in in the event of a disaster or storm or whatever the case may be.
Council will be—the committee also, sorry, examined some petitions relating to
the Wynnum State School site and that proposal. Look again I don't want to re[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
- 84 labour a point that's already been debated at length, but I can again only express
my disappointment that Labor councillors, particularly local councillors who are
getting significant benefit from their local wards, will oppose anything in this
place, any kind of community benefit, whether it's a new library, whether it's an
upgraded community facility, whether it's new parkland.
We saw today in Committee in relation to Marlborough Park, whether it's an
additional park available for usage, whether it's brand new croquet facilities,
competition style croquet facilities, but Labor councillors they're going
imposition is that they will oppose it no matter the community benefit.
Personally I think that's a little sad because the local community need these
facilities, they want these facilities and as a local Council and as councillors it's
up to us to find ways to deliver those facilities.
So where those facilities can be delivered at no cost, which is the case
particularly here at Wynnum to ratepayers, then I don't—it's hard for me to
fathom the objections.
I do—the only other thing I want to acknowledge with these petitions—
Councillor Interjecting.
Chairman:
Councillor ABRAHAMS don't yell out across the Chamber.
Councillor SIMMONDS:
Look the only other thing I did want to acknowledge with these petitions was
the leadership of Councillor SUTTON within the committee when she took the
opportunity to support the final petition, support the administration voting
through the recommendation of the final petition.
The recommendation, just for the sake of the council Chamber, reads thus:
Council considers that the dedication of land will provide a significant amount
of parkland than can be used by the community when the site is redeveloped.
The outcome for the residents of Wynnum is outstanding and will prompt the
reinvigoration of the retail heart of this area, supported by the new and expanded
library and new parkland.
So I appreciate Councillor SUTTON supporting that. I couldn't have said it
much better myself. I appreciate her leadership among her Labor colleagues and
I would greatly hope that through her leadership she can perhaps convince the
local councillor to stop opposing this very good community benefit and come on
board. Thank you very much.
Chairman:
Further debate. Councillor CUMMING.
Seriatim - Clauses B,C,D and E
Councillor Peter CUMMING requested that Clause B, PETITION – REQUESTING THAT COUNCIL
FACILITATE A COMMERCIAL CINEMA AT THE OLD WYNNUM CENTRAL STATE SCHOOL SITE,
Clause C, PETITION – REQUESTING THAT COUNCIL CREATE GREEN SPACE ON THE OLD
WYNNUM CENTRAL STATE SCHOOL SITE THAT IS 3,200 SQUARE METRES IN AREA WITH
40 METRE FRONTAGE TO BOTH FLORENCE AND CHARLOTTE STREETS, Clause D, PETITION –
REQUESTING RELEASE OF COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT PLANS FOR THE WYNNUM CENTRAL
STATE SCHOOL SITE, Clause E, PETITION – REQUESTING PARKLAND AT THE PROPOSED
WYNNUM CENTRAL STATE SCHOOL SITE, be taken seriatim en bloc for voting purposes.
Councillor CUMMING:
Madam Chair, I support a new library for Wynnum and it's a great idea. It was
promised by both sides of politics at the last council election and it will be a
good thing for the area. But how it's delivered is a matter of considerable
concern.
In relation to item B, the petition requiring a cinema, I'd just go over again, the
local community would love a cinema in the area. A cinema would draw people
into the area, it would give an enormous boost. A Woolworths supermarket
won't do that. There are already two food supermarkets in Wynnum Central.
There's a Coles and an IGA. They're all going to be all within 150 metres of
each other. There's already a Woolworths at Wynnum Plaza and Mayfair on
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
- 85 Manly, both within five minutes’ drive and it's called a second best option to
have a Woolworths. There's probably a third best option.
The other thing, Councillor SIMMONDS, I guess at the end of the day to the
general public in Wynnum Manly a free library is actually—it's not a better
facility than one that you've actually paid for.
The other thing is that in relation to items C and E, the problem with those,
Madam Chair, is the fact that this Council passed a Neighbourhood Plan for the
Wynnum Manly area which made specific reference to the old school site. Of
course, at that stage it wasn’t owned by Council. They said there should be a
park 3,200 metres in area, significant parkland and a really important area of
parkland because if the Neighbourhood Plan doesn't effectively see the light of
day in terms of new buildings being built, up to 1,200 extra residents could be
living in the Wynnum Central area. There are no parks anywhere nearby except
for down on the Esplanade, several hundred metres away, and there's old,
rundown, hidden areas of land owned by the Council on Wynnum Creek to the
north of the site.
So this parkland in the centre of Wynnum will be a crucial piece of land as time
goes on and it's very short-sighted to say that we'll cut a third of the area off,
which is what happened when the Council subdivided the site. Now, the Council
were the owners they thought, oh well, instead of 3,200 square metres we’ll
make 2,200 square metres, and I thought that was very disappointing.
So yes, it's good to have parkland but a parkland with a big chunk taken out of it
isn't real good, Councillor SIMMONDS.
In fact, it's so narrow when it starts, over on the Florence Street side of the
property it's only about 15-metres wide so there's this tiny level of—it's more
like an easement. The local wags are calling it the mowing strip, not the park. So
that's the problem with that matter.
In relation to item D there are concerns about what deals are being done in
relation to this site. It's never been publicised, you know, whether CBIC has
actually purchased the site off Council, whether they were given the site off
Council, whether Woolworths are getting reduced rent or something in relation
to—in return for providing the shell of a library.
They're not actually obviously fitting out the library, they're only putting the
library building there. Or is it Woolworths they're dealing with or is it a
developer that's going to be doing this? Is the developer going to be sold the
land? Is the developer going to be paying full market value? I've asked for
briefings on this. I've asked the Administration to make the details public so that
people know what the situation is, but they refuse to do so, so I’m just forced to
keep speculating what the situation is, and I don’t like doing that. I'd rather deal
with facts.
So I challenge Councillor SIMMONDS to come up with the facts, publish the
facts, and then people can have—see what the situation is. You know, it might
be quite innocent. You know, you might be causing yourself all sorts of grief for
no reason.
Madam Chair, they're my concerns about the matter and I won't be supporting
the recommendations in the petitions. The actual petition on the cinema has
actually got an online petition with about 600 signatures on it to date as well.
Thank you.
Chairman:
Further debate.
Councillor OWEN-TAYLOR: Thank you, Madam Chairman.
Chairman:
Councillor OWEN-TAYLOR.
Councillor OWEN-TAYLOR: Madam Chairman, I rise to speak briefly on this report and particularly in
reference to the presentation we received from the disaster management team
and the successful exercise that they undertook called Exercise Tempest.
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
- 86 Madam Chairman, the disaster management team here in Council have been
working extraordinarily hard over a significant period and they have taken the
learnings that have come from a number of natural disaster events and they have
put in place extensive procedures to ensure that, should the worst happen again,
that we as a Council are well prepared.
Madam Chairman, the officers working in that disaster management team, they
put in a lot of time and energy and they are really committed to the task that they
undertake and they really have the best interests of this city and the people who
live here as their main focus. They are continually working through a process of
ensuring that all the procedures that are in place have that continuous
improvement and that we can excel to deal with so many different variables in
any given event.
I'd just like to extend my congratulations to those officers for the work that they
have been putting in over that period of time because they are certainly bringing
this Council up to world's best practice standard in the area of disaster
management, and the information that they're putting out there in the community
is second to none, so congratulations to all the officers. Thank you Madam
Chairman.
Chairman:
Further debate. Councillor SUTTON.
Councillor SUTTON:
Yes, thanks, Madam Chair, just very quickly on item E as a matter of public
record. I just draw the Chamber's attention to paragraph 43 in that report, where
it says: in relation to requesting parkland at the proposed Wynnum Central State
School it says that the local councillor for Wynnum Manly, Councillor Peter
CUMMING, has been consulted and supports the preferred option.
That advice is clearly wrong and it was wrong in the papers that were distributed
to us and in the Finance Committee last week. I was unaware that that was
Councillor CUMMING's position and I was unaware at the Finance Committee
last week that those papers were wrong.
Had those papers been accurate I would have supported the view of the local
councillor. In any event I had attempted to contact Councillor CUMMING on
the morning before the committee meeting, however, for a range of reasons we
were unable to make contact.
So I based my decision to support this particular report in the Finance
Committee based on the information contained in the report which I
subsequently found out was inaccurate. I think it's important to put that on the
public record, particularly given the Chairperson's opening remarks on the
matter.
So when he brings forward accurate reports to the Finance Committee in the
future, I'm sure we will no longer have this problem.
Chairman:
Further debate. Councillor SIMMONDS.
Councillor SIMMONDS:
Thanks very much, Madam Chairman. First of all, perhaps I could deal with the
most extraordinary statement first, and that was the quote by Councillor
CUMMING that it's not a better facility just because you pay for it. What an
extraordinary comment. It is a better facility by the very virtue that you don't
pay for it, Madam Chairman, is the argument that I would put forward on behalf
of Brisbane ratepayers.
Well okay, Councillor ABRAHAMS, I take her comment. She says it does.
Fine. I know that their modus operandi is to simply raise rates, because we
know this community facility has to be delivered so they've only got two
choices. Or they've got three choices. They can scrap the project, which well
okay the Council hasn't supported up to date so maybe that's their plan. They
can raise rates or they can cut projects, Madam Chairman, that are already
existing.
If they're not willing to accept our funding strategy, which provides this new
facility at no extra cost to ratepayers, those are their three options. But the
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
- 87 flippant way, the flippant way that Councillor CUMMING simply says, oh well,
we’ll just pay for it. We’ll just pay for it, no worries. It's no problem.
Well, it has to come from somewhere, Councillor CUMMING. It doesn't come
out of your pocket, mate. It comes out of the ratepayers of Brisbane's pocket.
That's where it comes from, your residents in Wynnum paying extra rates to
deliver a facility because you are too bloody minded to accept a funding strategy
that delivers it at no cost to ratepayers. I honestly can't understand how they can
support or not support a proposal such as this.
That is why I so embraced Councillor SUTTON when I thought that she was
showing a bit of leadership amongst her team. It wasn't to be. it was folly—
metaphorically embraced her—
Councillor interjecting.
Councillor SIMMONDS:
It was folly, unfortunately. She has been brought into line by her backbenchers.
It's quite clear that the shadow Chairman for Finance and Economic
Development holds very little sway in that team over there. She can't even bring
her team with her—
Councillor interjecting.
Councillor SIMMONDS:
—on this incredibly important issue. She can't bring her team with her. she's
been pulled into line by the local councillor. It must have been a very
aggravating Caucus meeting before this council meeting.
I can assure the Chamber that the report that went to committee and to Council
today is absolutely correct. I did not bring through incorrect reports. Councillor
CUMMING on two occasions was given the opportunity to give his comments
about that particular petition. He was even advised by officers that if he didn't
put forward any comment it would be assumed that he had no comment and
therefore supported the recommendation.
Twice he had it, on 2 October and 14 October. I can only assume he's taking a
leaf out of Councillor ABRAHAMS' book that it's not in his job description.
Councillors interjecting.
Councillor SIMMONDS:
It's not in his job description to reply to petitions on behalf of his residents, on
behalf of the ratepayers of Brisbane. He's been given two opportunities over two
weeks. He hasn't even bothered to reply with an email. I don’t know what is
more fundamental to the job of a councillor than that. I mean, how long am I
meant to hold up the response to legitimate petitioners who have signed a
petition and they want a response. How long am I meant to hold it up and come
into committee so that Councillor CUMMING can get his act together and send
back a simple email saying I do or I don’t support it.
Councillor interjecting.
Councillor SIMMONDS:
If he'd done that—
Chairman:
Order.
Councillor SIMMONDS:
If he had done that, any day of the week I would have been happy to reflect it as
I always do.
Look, the other comment I wanted to make is about the cinema. Now look,
Council tries to be many things to many people in this city. I think we accept
that but I don’t think that there is too many level headed people who think it
would be a good idea for Council to branch into cinema ownership and running
a cinema. Right? We give a lot of things a really good try but honestly if the
market is saying—
Councillor interjecting.
Chairman:
Order.
Councillor SIMMONDS:
If the market—
Chairman:
Order. Councillor SUTTON.
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
- 88 I’ll pick that. If the market is saying that a cinema can't be supported in that
location I don't know why you would think it would be a good idea for Council
to suddenly go into operating and owning a cinema just to lose ratepayers'
money, because that's essentially what you're asking to do.
Councillor SIMMONDS:
I find it extraordinary—and I've been very sensibly being reminded here by
Councillor COOPER—that that would be in fact the Labor Party supporting
Council getting into a commercial opportunity.
Councillor interjecting.
Councillor SIMMONDS:
A commercial opportunity, taking on more commercial opportunities.
Councillor interjecting.
Councillor SIMMONDS:
Exactly. Here we would be—
Councillor CUMMING:
Madam Chair, point of order.
Chairman:
Point of order against you, Councillor SIMMONDS.
Councillor CUMMING:
I claim to be misrepresented, Madam Chair.
Chairman:
No, that's not misrepresentation, Councillor CUMMING.
Councillor SIMMONDS:
That's right. Councillor CUMMING, you can take the tickets and rip the tickets
at the door if you like—
Chairman:
Alright.
Councillor SIMMONDS:
—and sell the popcorn and we can get you a machine and everything. It will be
a lot of fun but it will lose ratepayers' money so we're not going to do it. It's
really simple. It's not our core business. The market's saying it will lose money
so we're not going to do it.
Finally, in relation to the parkland, well, I can only look back—if that's what
they say they wanted done I can only look back at what they did and I draw on
the example of what the previous Labor state government did just around the
corner at the Wynnum North State School when in fact they sold off the site for
a townhouse development. Not a park land, not extra park land, not anything for
the residents. Not a new library, not a new community facility. Sold it off.
So I can only say that I looked at the previous examples from what Labor had
done and I thought that's the wrong way to do it. We can do it better. We can
have community facilities, a park land, a library. We can have it all, if only the
local councillor would support us. It's disappointing that he doesn't. Thank you.
Chairman:
I will put the motion for item A.
Clause A put
Upon being submitted to the meeting the motion for the adoption of Clause A of the report of the Finance,
Economic Development and Administration Committee was declared carried on the voices.
Chairman:
I'll put the motion for items B, C, D and E.
Clauses B, C, D and E put
Upon being submitted to the meeting the motion for the adoption of Clauses B, C, D and E of the report of the
Finance, Economic Development and Administration Committee was declared carried on the voices.
Thereupon, Councillors Peter CUMMING and Victoria NEWTON immediately rose and called for a division,
which resulted in the motion being declared carried.
The voting was as follows:
AYES: 16 -
DEPUTY MAYOR,
Councillor
Adrian SCHRINNER,
and
Councillors
Krista ADAMS,
Matthew BOURKE,
Amanda COOPER,
Margaret de WIT,
Vicki HOWARD, Steven HUANG, Geraldine KNAPP, Kim MARX, Peter MATIC,
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
- 89 Ian McKENZIE, David McLACHLAN, Ryan MURPHY, Angela OWEN-TAYLOR,
Julian SIMMONDS and Andrew WINES.
NOES: 8 -
The Leader of the OPPOSITION, Councillor Milton DICK, and Councillors
Helen ABRAHAMS, Peter CUMMING, Kim FLESSER, Steve GRIFFITHS,
Victoria NEWTON, Shayne SUTTON and Nicole JOHNSTON.
The report read as follows
ATTENDANCE:
Councillor Julian Simmonds (Chairman), Councillor Angela Owen-Taylor (Deputy Chairman); and
Councillors Fiona King, Ryan Murphy and Shayne Sutton.
LEAVE OF ABSENCE:
Councillor Kim Flesser.
A
COMMITTEE PRESENTATION – EXERCISE TEMPEST
240/2014-15
1.
Jason Cameron, Manager, Disaster Management Office, Chief Executive’s Office attended
the meeting to provide an update on Exercise Tempest. He provided the information below.
2.
The annual Exercise Tempest for Council was held on 23 October 2014. The aim of the
exercise was to practice the local disaster management arrangements during a complex event
and assessed the following:
interoperability between the Local Disaster Coordination Centre (LDCC) groups;
capability of the LDCC to collect, manage and assess large amounts of information
during a complex event;
communications between the LDCC and the Regional Incident Management Teams
(RMITs – Operational Field officers);
effective engagement between the LDCC and Local Disaster Management Group
(LDMG);
Disaster Management Office transition of business as usual to disaster response
(LDCC activation); and
effectiveness of a new tasking and logging system (BIMS Online).
3.
The scope of Exercise Tempest was provided and detailed:
Exercise Tempest was a ‘real time’ event;
hypothetical incidents were injected into the scenario at specific timeframes;
participants are members of Council’s disaster management workforce, including
RIMTs, LDCC and the LDMG;
Exercise Control was managed by the Disaster Management Office;
concepts of response and recovery exercised at the operational and strategic level;
tactical level deploying of resources notionally; and
Rapid Assessment Team (RAT) in the field to test the rapid damage assessment
process, other tactical resources notionally deployed.
4.
The exercise commenced at 3am and was completed at 2pm on 23 October 2014. The
following controls were engaged:
activation of the RIMT commenced at 7am and was located at the West Regional
Business Centre;
the LDCC was activated at 8am and was located at Brisbane Square, Level 1;
the LDMG met at 10.30am at Balmoral Room, City Hall; and
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
- 90 -
-
Exercise Control (EXCON) was situated at Brisbane Square, Level 23 and West
Regional Business Centre.
5.
The exercise was to respond to a situation of a severe thunderstorm with destructive winds
and damaging hail that passed through the Brisbane local government area at approximately
6.15am, resulting in severe storm damage and flash flooding. The notional impacts to the area
of operations: The Gap, Ashgrove, Bardon and Paddington, included:
power loss to 80,000 residents across the Brisbane region;
loss of water supply (or low pressure water supply) to 12,000 residents;
loss and partial loss of homes and businesses;
damage to critical infrastructure (power substation/water grid);
road closures with fallen trees, power lines and flash flooding; and
mobile phone network congestions
6.
The LDCC Intelligence and Planning groups were engaged to make the affected area safe and
secure, planning responses to clean up infrastructure and return residents, businesses and
services to normal. Considerations included social, economic, infrastructure and environment
and were prioritised to identify:
unsafe areas and plan activities to ensure residents and worker safety;
any immediate issues for residents, any need for evacuations or alternative
accommodation;
affected roads including debris and infrastructure issues and make traffic
arrangements;
numbers of affected people in pump station outage zone and plan contingencies for
water supply (water distribution sites);
debris removal stations/locations available including hazardous material recovery
activities (business etc); and
communicate to affected residents.
7.
The LDMG membership and observers included:
the Chair of the LDMG is the Lord Mayor
the Local Disaster Coordinator is the Chief Executive Officer
external agencies of the LDMG included Queensland Police Service, Queensland Fire
and Emergency Services, Bureau of Meteorology, State Emergency Services,
Energex, APA – Gas, Queensland Urban Utilities, Queensland Government
Departments of Transport and Main Roads, Communities, Red Cross, St John’s
Ambulance, Port of Brisbane, Telstra, SEQ Water and Brisbane Airport Corporation.
8.
The LDMG priorities were provided:
four to six-hour response includes electrical safety, road access, damage assessment,
water supply for residents and businesses, communications and messaging, volunteer
management, transport network, water supply and infrastructure network, power
supply and utilities, additional support from other agencies;
six to 12-hour response includes impacts to businesses particularly food and
community services, identify evacuation routes and centres – identifying sites, access
and transport routes, identifying waste disposal sites including green and hazardous
waste and communications and messaging; and
12 to 48 hour response includes managing impacts on businesses – focus on services
and supply chain; managing evacuation centres and activating community and
recovery centres, communications and messaging, distribution of resources and
human social management and restoration of community services.
9.
The outcomes of Exercise Tempest were provided:
Warning Orders, Preliminary Impact Assessment and Situation Reports (SITREPs)
were delivered on time;
BIMS online provided to be efficient and capable. Automating processes and
reporting tools such as Response Plans, Emergency Action Plans, Intel Reports.
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
- 91 -
-
exercise objectives and outcomes were achieved;
LDCC briefings to LDMG were concise, effective and priorities were endorsed;
over 200 people trained in BIMS Online in nine days;
over 100 exercise participants; and
over 120 hypothetical incidents injected resulting in 322 logged activities and 96
tasks in three hours.
10.
Following a number of questions from the Committee, the Chairman thanked Mr Cameron for
his informative presentation.
11.
RECOMMENDATION:
THAT COUNCIL NOTE THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE ABOVE
REPORT.
ADOPTED
B
PETITION – REQUESTING THAT COUNCIL FACILITATE A
COMMERCIAL CINEMA AT THE OLD WYNNUM CENTRAL STATE
SCHOOL SITE
CA14/684872
241/2014-15
12.
A petition from Councillor Peter Cumming, requesting that Council facilitate a commercial
cinema at the old Wynnum Central State School site, was presented to the meeting of Council
held on 19 August 2014, by Councillor Julian Simmonds, and was received.
13.
The Divisional Manager, Organisational Services, supplied the following information.
14.
The Wynnum Central State School site was purchased by Council from the Queensland
Government.
15.
In 2013, Council lodged a development application for a Reconfiguration of Lot (ROL) to
subdivide the site into five lots. The above mentioned development application for the ROL
was approved 24 July 2014.
16.
A Material Change of Use (MCU) was lodged with Council by City of Brisbane Investment
Corporation (CBIC) to gain development approval for a complex with supporting car-parking
facilities. This complex will accommodate the new, larger Wynnum library and retail
tenancies.
17.
The petition was presented to Council at its meeting 19 August 2014. The petition includes
52 signatures that request Council facilitate a commercial cinema for the old Wynnum Central
State School site.
18.
A variety of uses were considered for this site but a mix of retail tenancies and a new library
were considered the most advantageous outcome for the community.
Consultation
19.
The local Ward Councillor for Wynnum Manly, Councillor Peter Cumming, has been
consulted and does not support the recommendation below.
20.
The Divisional Manager therefore recommends as follows and the Committee agrees, with
Councillor Shayne Sutton dissenting.
21.
RECOMMENDATION:
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
- 92 -
THAT COUNCIL APPROVE THE RESPONSE TO THE HEAD PETITIONER AS
SET OUT IN ATTACHMENT A, submitted hereunder.
Attachment A
Petition Reference:
CA14/684872
Council has recently purchased the old Wynnum Central State School site from the State Government
and is undertaking redevelopment of that site for a new Wynnum Library and a refurbished
community centre.
In 2013, Council lodged a development application for a Reconfiguration of Lot (ROL) to subdivide
the site into five lots. The development application for the ROL was approved 24 July 2014.
A variety of uses were considered for this site but a mix of retail tenancies and a new library were
considered the most advantageous outcome for the community.
Thank you for raising your concerns.
ADOPTED
C
PETITION – REQUESTING THAT COUNCIL CREATE GREEN SPACE ON
THE OLD WYNNUM CENTRAL STATE SCHOOL SITE THAT IS
3,200 SQUARE METRES IN AREA WITH 40 METRE FRONTAGE TO
BOTH FLORENCE AND CHARLOTTE STREETS
CA14/756441
242/2014-15
22.
A petition from Councillor Peter Cumming, requesting Council create green space on the old
Wynnum Central State School site that is 3200 square metres in area with 40 metre frontage
to both Florence and Charlotte Streets, was presented to the meeting of Council held on 2
September 2014, by Councillor Julian Simmonds, and was received.
23.
The Divisional Manager, Organisational Services, supplied the following information.
24.
The Wynnum Central State School site was purchased by Council from the Queensland
Government.
25.
In 2013, Council lodged a development application for a Realignment of Lot (ROL) to
subdivide the site into five lots. The above mentioned development application for the ROL
was approved on 24 July 2014.
26.
Under that approval a 2,232 square metre park will be provided with a frontage to Charlotte
Street of 43.62 metres and Florence Street of 15 metres. This is a significant amount of
parkland that provides park and open space that can be used by the local community when the
site is redeveloped.
Consultation
27.
The local Ward Councillor for Wynnum Manly, Councillor Peter Cumming, has been
consulted and does not support the recommendation below.
28.
The Divisional Manager therefore recommends as follows and the Committee agrees, with
Councillor Shayne Sutton dissenting.
29.
RECOMMENDATION:
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
- 93 -
THAT COUNCIL APPROVE THE RESPONSE TO THE HEAD PETITIONER AS
SET OUT IN ATTACHMENT A, submitted hereunder.
Attachment A
Petition Reference:
CA14/756441
In reference to your petition of 1 September 2014 requesting Council withdraws their current
application to subdivide the old Wynnum Central State School site, and replace it with an application
that is in accordance with the Wynnum Manly Neighbourhood Plan.
Council has approved a reconfiguration of the old Wynnum State School site which delivers parkland
with an area of 2,232 square metres with a frontage to Charlotte Street at 43.62 metres and to Florence
Street at 15 metres.
Council considers that the dedication of land will provide a significant amount of parkland that can be
used by the local community when the site is redeveloped. The outcome for the residents of Wynnum
is outstanding and will prompt the reinvigoration of the retail heart of this area, supported by the new
and expanded Library and new parkland.
ADOPTED
D
PETITION
–
REQUESTING
RELEASE
OF
COMMERCIAL
DEVELOPMENT PLANS FOR THE WYNNUM CENTRAL STATE SCHOOL
SITE
CA14/102833
243/2014-15
30.
A petition from Councillor Peter Cumming, requesting release of commercial development
plans for the Wynnum Central State School site, was received during the Summer Recess
2014.
31.
The Divisional Manager, Organisational Services, supplied the following information.
32.
The Wynnum Central State School site was purchased by Council from the Queensland
Government.
33.
In 2013, Council lodged a development application for a Reconfiguration of Lot (ROL) to
subdivide the site into five lots. The above mentioned development application for the ROL
was approved on 24 July 2014.
34.
A Material Change of Use (MCU) application was lodged with Council by the City of
Brisbane Investment Corporation (CBIC) to gain development approval for a complex with
supporting car-parking facilities. This complex will accommodate the new, larger Wynnum
Library and retail tenancies. This application and supporting information about the
commercial
development
can
be
viewed
on
Council’s
website
at
www.brisbane.qld.gov./pdonline by searching reference number A003941869. As this
application is code assessable, there is no formal submission period, however any comments
provided will be considered as part of the assessment process.
Consultation
35.
The Local Ward Councillor for Wynnum Manly, Councillor Peter Cumming, has been
consulted and does not support the recommendation below.
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
- 94 -
36.
The Divisional Manager recommends as follows and the Committee agrees, with Councillor
Shayne Sutton dissenting.
37.
RECOMMENDATION:
THAT COUNCIL APPROVE THE RESPONSE TO THE HEAD PETITIONER AS
SET OUT IN ATTACHMENT A, submitted hereunder.
Attachment A
Petition Reference:
CA14/102833
Council has recently purchased the old Wynnum Central State School Site from the State Government
and is undertaking redevelopment of that site for a new Wynnum Library and refurbished community
centre.
In 2013, Council lodged a development application for a Reconfiguration of Lot (ROL) to subdivide
the site into five lots. The development application for ROL was approved on 24 July 2104.
A Material Change of Use (MCU) application was lodged with Council by the City of Brisbane
Investment Corporation (CBIC) to gain development approval for a complex with supporting car
parking facilities. This complex will accommodate the new, larger Wynnum Library and retail
tenancies. This application and supporting information about the commercial development can be
viewed on Council’s website at commercial development can be viewed on Council website at
www.brisbane.qld.gov.au/pdonline by searching reference number A003941869. As this application
is Code Assessable, there is no formal submission period, however any comments provided will be
considered as part of the assessment process.
ADOPTED
E
PETITION – REQUESTING PARKLAND AT THE PROPOSED WYNNUM
CENTRAL STATE SCHOOL SITE
CA14/730522
244/2014-15
38.
A petition from Councillor Peter Cumming, requesting parkland at the proposed Wynnum
Central State School site, was presented to the meeting of Council held on 9 September 2014,
by Councillor Julian Simmonds, and received.
39.
The Divisional Manager, Organisational Services, supplied the following information.
40.
The Wynnum Central State School site was purchased by Council from the Queensland
Government.
41.
In 2013, Council lodged a development application for a Reconfiguration of Lot (ROL) to
subdivide the site into five lots. The above mentioned development application for the ROL
was approved on 24 July 2014.
42.
Under that approval a 2,232 square metre park will be provided with a frontage to Charlotte
Street of 43.62 metres and Florence Street of 15 metres. This is a significant amount of
parkland that provides park and open space that can be used by the local community when the
site is redeveloped.
Consultation
43.
The Local Ward Councillor for Wynnum Manly, Councillor Peter Cumming has been
consulted and supports the recommendation below.
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
- 95 -
44.
The Divisional Manager therefore recommends as follows and the Committee agrees
unanimously.
45.
RECOMMENDATION:
THAT COUNCIL APPROVE THE RESPONSE TO THE HEAD PETITIONER AS
SET OUT IN ATTACHMENT A, submitted hereunder.
Attachment A
Petition Reference:
CA14/730522
In reference to your petition of 1 September 2014 requesting Council withdraws their current
application to subdivide the old Wynnum Central State School site, and replace it with an application
that is in accordance with the Wynnum Manly Neighbourhood Plan.
Council has approved a reconfiguration of the old Wynnum State School site which delivers parkland
with an area of 2,232 square metres with a frontage to Charlotte Street at 43.62 metres and to Florence
Street at 15 metres.
Council considers that the dedication of land will provide a significant amount of parkland that can be
used by the community when the site is redeveloped. The outcome for the residents of Wynnum is
outstanding and will prompt the reinvigoration of the retail heart of this area, supported by the new
and expanded Library and new parkland.
ADOPTED
PRESENTATION OF PETITIONS:
Chairman:
Councillors, are there any petitions?
Councillor SUTTON:
Yes, Madam Chair.
Chairman:
Councillor SUTTON.
Councillor SUTTON:
Thank you, Madam Chair. I rise to present a petition calling on Council to
install toilets in Perth Street Park.
Chairman:
Councillor FLESSER.
Councillor FLESSER:
Thank you, Madam Chairman. An e-petition requesting installation of a
pedestrian crossing at Beenleigh Railway Station.
Chairman:
Councillor WINES. Microphone.
Councillor WINES:
Excuse me. I have a petition requesting Council provide time limited parking in
Minimine Street, Stafford.
Chairman:
Councillor HOWARD.
Councillor HOWARD:
Thank you, Madam Chairman. I have a petition regarding the proposed
alteration to the dog off leash park at the Powerhouse, New Farm.
Chairman:
Councillor BOURKE.
Councillor BOURKE:
Madam Chairman, I present a petition relating to parking issues in Jacksonia
Drive, Seventeen Mile Rocks.
Chairman:
Councillor MATIC.
Councillor MATIC:
Madam Chairman, I present an e-petition for petitioners for a new skate park in
Towong—Taringa for presentation.
Chairman:
Councillor MURPHY.
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
- 96 Councillor MURPHY:
Madam Chairman, I have a petition calling on Council to enact vegetation
protection orders in Hammond.
Chairman:
Councillor ABRAHAMS.
Councillor ABRAHAMS:
Thank you, Madam Chair. A petition for pedestrian safety at the intersection of
Victoria Street and Montague Road.
Chairman:
Councillor GRIFFITHS.
Councillor GRIFFITHS:
Yes, thanks, Madam Chair, I have a petition from residents in Sunnybank for
lighting in Gaddes Park to make it safer.
Chairman:
No further petitions. Councillor MURPHY.
245/2014-15
It was resolved on the motion of Councillor Ryan MURPHY, seconded by Councillor Victoria NEWTON, that
the petitions as presented be received and referred to the Committee concerned for consideration and report.
The petitions were summarised as follows:
File No.
CA14/903372
CA14/903304
Councillor
Shayne Sutton
Kim Flesser
CA14/892629
Andrew Wines
CA14/89024
Vicki Howard
CA14/913555
Matthew Bourke
CA14/903126
Peter Matic
CA14/899439
Ryan Murphy
CA14/900505
Helen Abrahams
CA14/913645
Steve Griffiths
Topic
Requesting public toilets at Perth Street Park, Camp Hill
Requesting the installation of the east pedestrian crossing at
Banyo Station
Requesting Council provide time-limited parking in Minimine
Street, Stafford
Regarding proposed alteration to dog off-leash park at the
Powerhouse, New Farm
Requesting that Council support signage to mid-road car
parking spaces in Jacksonia Drive, Seventeen Mile Rocks
Requesting Council install a new skate park in
Toowong/Taringa
Requesting Council protect Hemmant’s rural landscape and
natural environment
Requesting Council improve safety at Montague Road, West
End
Requesting Council install lighting in Gaddes Park, Sunnybank.
GENERAL BUSINESS:
Chairman:
Councillors, are there any statements required as a result of a Councillor
Conduct Review Panel order? Councillors are there any matters of general
business? Councillor WINES.
Councillor WINES:
Thank you, Madam Chairman. I'm just going to speak very briefly on some local
ward matters, principally the Big Aussie BBQ, the 20th anniversary of the Ferny
Grove 10 Neighbourhood Watch and Blackwood Street Halloween.
I'd like to begin by discussing the Big Aussie BBQ, which was a fundraiser for
prostate cancer research, or research into addressing the prostate cancer
concerns. Many of us should recall the giant blue Weber style barbeque that was
in King George Square. There was an event promoted by Matthew Hayden and
we in the north-west took an opportunity to raise some funds for that event. It
was held in Blackwood Street in conjunction with the Bunya Lions who
generously brought along their barbeque and I'd like to recognise a couple of
people there for their support. Principally, Kevin Hedges and Rolly McAtee and
all the guys who came out to help on the day. Kay Liddle, Dave, Noel Dowse,
John Creigh and all the team from Bunya Lions who came to support us that
day.
But also, a great deal of support came from the Blackwood Street Chamber of
Commerce and it was attended by their president John Sinnamon who is a
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
- 97 regular and constant support for the advancement of Blackwood Street. Also,
further assistance and support was provided by the Bendigo Bank and their
manager Jane Dunk, and I'd like to congratulate Jane Dunk because her son Ben
was recently selected to play cricket for Australia in the—by the Hurricanes.
I'd also like to take an opportunity to congratulate the Ferny Grove 10
Neighbourhood Watch on their 20th anniversary. This is an organisation whose
neighbourhood watch area looks after the bulk of Ferny Grove and I know that
the service that they provide to Ferny Grove is excellent and I know that the
people of Ferny Grove appreciate the service provided by them, both through
the newsletters and other more practical ways.
I'd like to recognise Ian Moller and his team for their efforts and enthusiasm in
working for a better Ferny Grove. I'd also like to take an opportunity to
recognise Allan Adams, who was a founding member of the Ferny Grove 10
Neighbourhood Watch who was able to attend the 20th anniversary celebrations.
Congratulations and thanks to all involved.
On Friday night there was a fantastic event called the Blackwood Street
Halloween, which was attended by a great number of people. I would suggest,
due to its popularity, it may require an event permit next year, but this year it
was a hugely fantastic event enjoyed by all walks of life in the north-west
community.
Upon arrival I saw a very old friend of mine, Craig Taylor, who is now the
senior fire fighter at Enoggera Fire Station—was there with his truck. Very
popular among the children. Firemen are always well received. I saw Mark
Doolan down there, who is of course a senior academic at QUT. I saw Cynthia
Kennedy, who most people here would know as Mrs Murray Watt, was there
with the kids.
It was all people across north-west Brisbane—
Councillor interjecting.
Councillors interjecting.
Councillor WINES:
Well okay, the Labor councillors—
Chairman:
Don't be distracted, Councillor WINES.
Councillor WINES:
The councillor seems to have taken offence to me referencing her—
Councillor interjecting.
Chairman:
Order. Be quiet.
Councillor WINES:
Look, I think the Labor councillors—
Chairman:
You don't have the floor.
Councillor WINES:
—are being a little petty about this but Ms Kennedy is married to Mr Murray
Watt, MP, former MP for Everton, and she is a regular at the Mitchelton P&C
and she was there on Friday afternoon with her children.
I want to thank a number of businesses who took it upon themselves to organise
great portions of the event, in particular Geronimo Jerky and Tavinos restaurant
and all the businesses who supported and participated in the Halloween event.
For those people who don’t believe in Halloween it's important to remember that
it is an ancient Celtic celebration that marks the end of the Celtic year and it is
the period where the old and the new come together. Sometimes it's called
Halloween, sometimes it's called Samhain, depending on which series of myths
you subscribe to, it is one of the four high Sabbaths of the witch cult. It also, as I
say, the Celtic new year. Some legends say that the name Samhain reflects an
actual demon who people would cover their faces to hide from him and provide
lollies and the heads of pumpkins as a symbolic ritual sacrifice to stop this
demon, Samhain, from coming. Whatever you—
Councillor interjecting.
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
- 98 Chairman:
Order. Don't be distracted Councillor WINES. Yes, it's going on record.
Councillor WINES:
Well so many people like to go around making all kinds of claims about
Halloween but in the end of the day, regardless of how the Labor councillors
feel about it, it was a fantastically fun event that should be supported by all
councillors.
Councillor:
Hear, hear.
Chairman:
Further general business. Councillor FLESSER.
Councillor FLESSER:
Thank you, Madam Chair. I just want to make a quick comment about the
PLACA law. I apologise, not wishing to reopen the debate, but I'm afraid that
I'm concerned that the LORD MAYOR may have misled the Chamber when he,
in his summing up, said that I had selectively quoted some words and that
somehow those words that I used didn't reflect the true meaning of this law that
Councillor BOURKE has brought in today.
Now, Madam Chair, I'd like to direct the Council Chamber to Part 2, a
regulation of parks, section 9, section 3, where it reads—this is in relation to
having to book a park and getting a consent from Council to book a park. It
says: activities which are not commercial but which have any of the following
elements also require Council consent, i.e. a permit in Section F.
If the LORD MAYOR said that I said that the activities involving significant
numbers of participants and that have the potential to damage the park would
adversely affect adjoining landowners and occupiers, Madam Chair, those
people only would be required to get a permit. That would be correct.
But that's not what the local law says. It says: activities involving significant
numbers of participants and/or that have the potential to damage parks. So,
Madam Chair, in this case you'd use either and or. If you go down to the or path,
it means that activities involving significant numbers of participants or that have
the potential to damage the park will require a permit. But what that means is
the way this law is worded: any activities involving significant numbers of
participants require a park permit. That is clear. That's what the law says.
Now, Madam Chair, if that is not correct, well then, obviously I'd like to—
maybe Councillor BOURKE might want to explain that. But because it has the
word or there, it explicitly says that it is required to get council consent to have
an activity involving significant numbers of participants. We don't know that
there's nothing else in there that says what a significant number of participants
are. We've seen some guidelines that refer to 20 people and 50 people but we
know that those numbers aren't actually in this local law.
So, Madam Chair, I'm happy to be corrected but as the law stands because it has
the word or there, maybe not initially but at some stage in the future it's quite
feasible that a council officer could read that, and if you've got an activity
involving a significant number of participants at a park, well then, you have to
have a permit.
Chairman:
Further general business. Councillor GRIFFITHS:
Councillor GRIFFITHS:
Yes, Madam Chair, I do understand we're getting close to time so I'll be very
quick. I did make a commitment to residents on the weekend at a public meeting
I was at, at Clifton Hill, to speak about a development application. There was
100 people plus at this particular meeting in Clifton Hill and it was as part of the
Clifton Hill war service precinct. There has been an application received by
Council for 55 Delville Avenue, Moorooka, to split an 810 metre block.
The residents have taken this up before and this Council in a unanimous way
have—so Labor and Liberal have made changes to the City Plan to ensure that
there was no block splitting in historic Clifton Hill.
For those of you who aren't aware, Clifton Hill in Moorooka is an area where
World War I soldiers were given homes when they returned from service after
fighting in France. It's celebrating its centenary this year.
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
- 99 So, Madam Chair, I've made a commitment that I'd read a statement out on
behalf of the residents and just put on the record that I and the Labor Party want
to continue the protection of this historical area and not allow any block
splitting, and that we are looking for the administration to be supporting us in
this particular aim.
So far there has been—I understand, so far there has been over 100 submissions
and there was this unanimous motion moved at the meeting, which I'll read out
now: the residents here today call on all members of the Council and its officers
in the Brisbane City Council Planning Department to abide by the local
Moorooka area plan in both words and intent and reject both this application—
and it's got the application number—and any future applications for subdivision
of land in this estate resulting in lots under 800 metres square.
Madam Chair, I understand that a delegation has made a meeting time with
Councillor COOPER and the LORD MAYOR and I look forward to seeing the
outcome of that.
Just to reinforce, this is a very historic area for our city. It is coming up to its
centenary this year, and that we should not be accepting any subdivision in this
area of Clifton Hill as it is, to my understanding, one of the last remaining intact
soldier settlements in Australia. Thank you.
Chairman:
Further general business. Councillor JOHNSTON.
Councillor JOHNSTON:
Yes, Madam Chairman, I rise to speak on four items, the portable flashing
lights, the Corinda dog off leash area, the recent Junction Park State School visit
to Council and Remembrance Day.
I would just like to start with Remembrance Day very briefly. I think it's
probably one of the more callous things that the LNP has done today by not
allowing a simple motion go through to respect our veterans on what is an
important day of remembrance for our community.
I think that the only reason that that occurred is because I moved the motion and
Councillor MATIC could have simply let it go through the committee and it
could have gone through this Council. But it just shows how petty and smallminded the LNP councillors are that they voted against what was a pretty
straight-forward motion. A motion that was actually accepted in the
Infrastructure Committee as well. So that will be on your public records that you
do not support this Council adjourning its meeting for a couple of hours for
Remembrance Day, but the LNP does support Council adjourning for
Melbourne Cup Day. I will at every opportunity make sure that view is known
to the Veterans and our leaders of the veteran community.
Secondly, portable flashing lights. Well I don't think we should call them
portable flashing lights anymore, we should call them permanent lights. I
noticed that it took six weeks for the portable flashing lights to be moved about
three months ago and then I noticed that the last one after two months was still
in the same place. It's now heading onto three months and the portable flashing
light is still sitting in the same spot on Oxley Road at Corinda. Now the officers
have told me why that's the case, they've run out of money. Councillor
SCHRINNER hasn't got enough money for them to actually continue making
the portable flashing lights move—
Councillor interjecting.
Councillor JOHNSTON:
—yes, they got eight movements around and now they've run out of money. So
now I'm told, this is by the officers, now I'm told that the lights will only be
moved, and they're not entirely clear, but no more than every two months. All
the lights will be moved together at the same time, they will not be moved at the
request of the councillors and apparently this dictum comes from the DEPUTY
MAYOR, our Councillor SCHRINNER.
Now I've written to Councillor SCHRINNER, probably two or three weeks ago
and of course I've had no response from him. But remember this was an election
commitment of the LORD MAYOR. He stood up and he said, yes, councillors
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
- 100 will be able to move them around at their discretion. They are going to go to the
hotspots, this will be a fabulous program.
Well I can tell you know that the list is long for where these portable flashing
lights will go—but three months on and the DEPUTY MAYOR has not moved
them at my request. It is a wasted opportunity, it shows that this LORD
MAYOR is all talk and no action when it comes to delivering on his
commitments. There's a grand announcement, a grand plan, but they absolutely
cannot follow through and do what they promise.
So anyway, presumably I'll get something back in writing but I'm happy to tell
the groups who are asking me, that the DEPUTY MAYOR will not allow the
lights to be moved because that's what the officers have told me. I think it's quite
disappointing, it really shows what bad managers this Administration are when
it comes to delivering on their promises. Apparently they've got millions of
dollars left over from road projects, why on earth aren't they putting a bit of it in
to moving these flashing lights around but anyway.
The Corinda dog off-leash area. Now, recently, I funded both a new footpath
and some upgrades to the Corinda dog off-leash area from my Ward Parks Trust
Funds. Councillors will remember this is where the officers said no, they
wouldn't put the noticeboard in and then I brought a petition in here and they
still said no they wouldn't put a noticeboard in. so we had a debate and basically
they said well if you nominate a resident to be in charge of the noticeboard we'll
allow you to have it. then when the resident said yes he was happy to do it, they
didn't want to put the noticeboard where he could manage it, they wanted to put
it somewhere else. Finally after months and months of going back and forth, the
noticeboard is in, the footpath is in and the community thinks it's great.
One of my very distinguished Corinda residents wrote a poem which we had at
the event and I'd like to share it with Council. It's called the Dog Park.
'Twas two of our seniors, Russell and Brad; Who first thought a path to the park
should be had; For people with prams, wheelchairs too; Matt will come
Guinness if you stop eating poo—Guinness is a dog, don't worry—As the dog
park family steadily grew; They needed a way to share their news; A
noticeboard was needed for letters and flyers; Invites, announcements, but not
advertisers; Brad asked the Council and Council said no; But this resourceful
old gent, knew just where to go; He emailed and spoke to our good friend
Nicole; Finally the improvements were ready to roll; All the dogs watched as he
banged in a sign; Because Brad knew the spot that would just be fine; When the
mesh appeared and the work began; They obligingly marked it again and again;
So here we all stand in our new improved park; Where the dogs will lollop, leap
and bark; And the humans will happily roll up to the gate; Then read the new
board and stay up to date.
I really want to thank Theresa who's a teacher at Darra, lives in my area, so
clever people out there Councillor DICK. She read that poem at the opening we
had and the event, it is a stunning poem, it is a reflection of the goodwill and the
persistence of the residents of Corinda, that we have this fantastic new resource
which will benefit the community and the local school.
I just want to say thank you very much to Brad Brinstead the chief petitioner,
Russell Brock and his family, and Theresa for her beautiful poem on the day.
It’s just really been a great community effort there.
Finally I’d just like to mention how clever the young people at Junction Park
State School at Annerley are. Recently I hosted the grade 4/5 class here at
council for a tour and a discussion about democracy. It was an absolutely
brilliant day; we came into the Chamber and had a debate about how to spend $1
million in here. It started off being should we spend the $1 million on roads, and
then halfway through they decided they wanted to spend it on some other things
and they moved an amendment, they had a discussion, everyone participated,
and there were journalists, there was a Lord Mayor, there was a Chairman. We
had a cracking time, these young children really got into the spirit of democracy,
understanding the importance of community and basically they agreed that some
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
- 101 money should go to roads, but some money should go to things like libraries and
pools and homelessness services. It was a really constructive effort and I just
want to thank Junction Park State School parents, the students and their teacher
Mrs Fox for such a wonderful and rewarding day, hopefully for the children and
certainly for me. It was just fantastic.
Chairman:
Further general business, I declare the meeting closed.
QUESTIONS OF WHICH DUE NOTICE HAS BEEN GIVEN:
(Questions of which due notice has been given are printed as supplied and are not edited)
Submitted by Councillor Victoria Newton (received on 30 October 2014)
Q1.
Please provide the amount of funds collected in infrastructure charges per year for each year from
2009-2014 inclusive for Sewerage Network in the following Service Catchments
BBnePrec 3
BBne Prec3 LMSP
West End (a)
West End (b)
Q2.
Please provide the map showing the boundaries for the following Service Catchments
BBne Prec 3
BBne Prec 3 LMSP
West End (a)
West End (b)
Q3.
Please provide the amount of fund collected in infrastructure charges per year from 2009-2014
inclusive from development in The Gabba Ward for Community Purpose Network for the Urban
South Service Catchment.
Q4
Please provide the amount of fund collected in infrastructure charges per year from 2009-2014
inclusive from development in The Gabba Ward for Road Network for Service Catchment 8.
Q5.
Please provide the amount of fund collected in infrastructure charges per year from 2009-2014
inclusive from development in The Gabba Ward for Sewerage Network for the Service Catchment S1
Luggage Point
Q6.
Please advise how many complaints Brisbane City Council has received about dogs “rushing” at a
person?
Q7.
Please advise how many times Brisbane City Council has taken a dog owner to court about a dog
“rushing” at a person?
Q8.
Please advise how many times a decision has been made in Brisbane City Council’s favour about a
dog “rushing” at a person?
ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS OF WHICH DUE NOTICE HAS BEEN
GIVEN:
(Answers to questions of which due notice has been given are printed as supplied and are not edited)
Submitted by Councillor Victoria Newton (from meeting on 28 October 2014)
Q1.
Please provide details of all payments made by the City of Brisbane Investment Corporation (CBIC)
to CBIC directors, that are not included in the ‘Directors’ fees’ ($320k) line item, published in the
2013/2014 CBIC Annual Report?
A1.
0.
Q2.
Could you please list all cash and property contributions made by Council to the City of Brisbane
Investment Corporation since its inception. Please provide the date each contribution was made and
the value of each property contribution?
DATE CONTRIBUTED
ADDRESS OF ASSET (IF PROPERTY
CONTRIBUTION)
VALUE OF ASSET
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
- 102 A2.
In 2008-09, $123 million (being the proceeds from the transfer of Council’s bulk water assets to the
State) was invested in CBIC.
Also see the answer to last week’s answers to questions on notice in relation to property transfers at
book value.
Q3
Please advise how much revenue Brisbane City Council has received in fines for dogs being off leash
in public spaces in the following financial years:2013/14
2012/13
2011/12
2010/11
A3.
This data is not readily available and cannot be determined within the timeframe for responses
required by the Meetings Local Law 2001.
However, information on the number of fines issued was recently provided via an answer to a
question on notice.
Q4.
Please provide a list of the top ten suburbs (ie the location where the fine occurred) where people
have been fined for dogs being off-leash in public areas in:2013/14
2012/13
2011/12
2010/11
A4.
Top suburb highest
2013/14
SUBURB
Bracken Ridge
Inala
Forest Lake
Brighton
Zillmere
Acacia Ridge
Stafford
Stafford Heights
Sunnybank Hills
Wynnum
Bald hills
2012/13
SUBURB
Zillmere
Inala
Bracken Ridge
Wynnum West
Wynnum
Forest Lake
Manly West
Moorooka
Acacia Ridge
Holland Park
2011/12
SUBURB
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]
- 103 Nudgee Beach
Sandgate
Zillmere
Everton Park
Forest Lake
Kedron
Acacia Ridge
Bracken Ridge
Inala
Calamvale
2010/11
SUBURB
Bracken Ridge
Aspley
Stafford Heights
Brighton
Chermside
Boondall
Bald hills
Zillmere
Inala
Kedron
Manly West
Q5
Please provide the list of the top ten locations (ie the specific park or other public space where the
fine occurred) where people have been fined for dogs being off-leash in public areas in:2013/14
2012/13
2011/12
2010/11
A5.
Council does not record specific parks or public spaces where the infringement occurs, only the
nearest street and suburb.
RISING OF COUNCIL:
7.23pm.
PRESENTED:
and CONFIRMED
CHAIRMAN
Council officers in attendance:
James Withers (Senior Council and Committee Officer)
Jo Camamile (Council and Committee Officer)
Shivaji Solao (Acting Council and Committee Officer)
Billy Peers (Personal Support Officer to the Lord Mayor and Council Orderly)
[4451 (Ordinary) Meeting – 4 November 2014]