On the 2nd of November Anna Bligh introduced a new bill into parliament, the State Development and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2006. It passed the “second reading” stage, and is due to be voted into legislation when parliament sits again next Tuesday (28th).

A copy of the Bill can be found at:


The explanatory notes are much easier to read:

All of the quotations below are from this source.

I am not a lawyer, so I’d appreciate input from any of our resident legal eagles. However, as I read it, this legislation has a profound impact on the future of the Traveston Crossing Dam project. The major thrust of the legislation appears to be to give the Coordinator-General of the department of State Development extraordinary powers to fast-track “significant” projects.

In circumstances when another “decision maker” (for instance another government department, or a local government authority) is involved in the approval process for a project, the C-G can at any time “step in” and take over their authority.

Quote:

In circumstances, either where the “notice to decide” request has not been complied with by a decision maker, or where the Coordinator- General considers that it would be beneficial to manage a decision from a whole of government basis, the Coordinator-General may under certain conditions issue a “step in notice” and assume the role of decision maker for the decision.

Quote:

To assist the Coordinator-General in assessing the prescribed decision, the Coordinator-General is vested with all the legislative powers and functions of the original decision maker.

Sound scary? Well wait, there’s more.

The Bill also amends the Judicial Review Act 1991, “to clarify that decisions relating to critical infrastructure under Part 5A SDPWO Act are non-reviewable.”

Quote:

The inclusion of a provision that effectively removes the right to review or appeal of a decision made under this part and removes the right to judicial review under the Judicial Review Act 1991 for those prescribed projects which are classed as critical infrastructure.

Quote:

The new s76P(1) provides that the Coordinator-General’s decision is conclusive and not subject to any objection or appeal under the SDPWO Act; or the relevant law. The new s76W removes the right to review under the Judicial Review Act 1991 for only those projects declared as critical infrastructure projects. Removing the right to appeal also prevents vexatious litigants from starting actions.

So will the rights of the people of Queensland under the Judicial Review Act 1991 will be squashed? Will the C-G of the Department of State Development effectively be above the law? What does the Legislative Standards Act 1992 have to say about this?

Quote:

The Legislative Standards Act 1992 defines fundamental legislative principles (“FLPs”) as ‘principles relating to legislation that underlie a parliamentary democracy based on the rule of law.’ Section 4(3)(b) of the Legislative Standards Act 1992 provides that legislation should be consistent with principles of natural justice. Natural justice principles are derived from the common law and includes the right to be heard, an absence of bias and procedural fairness.