Questions raised over ‘cosy’ relationship between Allan government and planning industry

The Premier’s office secretly called the state’s top industry figures before a probe into a controversial planning overhaul, an inquiry has heard, sparking questions about the relationship between the government and heads of Victoria’s peak property bodies.

The Premier’s office secretly called up the state’s top industry figures ahead of a key inquiry into the government’s controversial planning overhaul.

The revelation has prompted questions about the “cosy” relationship between the Allan government and the heads of Victoria’s peak property and housing bodies.

Property Council of Australia Victorian executive director Cath Evans, Housing Industry Association Victorian executive director Keith Ryan and Urban Development Institute of Australia Victorian chief executive Linda Allison were hauled in front of a major planning inquiry on Tuesday where they were grilled by senior Liberal MPs.

The interrogation was centred around the industry figures’ support for the Allan government’s plan to pump tens of thousands of apartments and townhouses into suburban Melbourne to tackle the state’s housing crisis.

Committee member and opposition upper house leader David Davis questioned the trio over whether they had decided to “go soft on the government on tax” and were “rolling over nicely”.

David Davis pressed all three leaders on whether the state government had contacted them ahead of the hearing. Picture: David Geraghty

Ms Allison, however, said they were responding to the three planning amendments, not to tax settings.

Mr Davis then pressed all three leaders on whether the state government had contacted them ahead of the hearing, prompting umming and ahhing from the panel.

Mr Ryan confirmed that the government had contacted him.

“I did, when the inquiry was first announced, get a phone call from the Premier’s office telling me it was happening,” he said.

“That was good to get the heads-up that it was happening.”

Ms Evans was left stumped by the question, pausing as she tried to “reflect on the phone calls” she had received.

“My recollection is of being notified by the Premier’s office … I would have to check my notes.”

Property Council of Australia Victorian executive director Cath Evans tried to ‘reflect on the phone calls’ she received. Picture Jake Nowakowski

Ms Allison, who had initially said she had not been contacted by the Premier’s office “on this matter”, later corrected herself, saying she had also received a call from the Premier’s office.

She said the call was to let her know “of the intention of the select committee to be established … what that process may entail, and the potential delay of the introduction of these amendments.”

“They wanted to make us aware of the potential outcome,” she said.

“They asked us to consider whether that was an outcome that we would support.”

Mr Davis said the hearing “only raised even more serious questions about Labor’s conduct in ramming through these planning changes” as he raised concerns about the “cosy” relationship between government and industry.

“If there has been inappropriate contact between the Premier’s Private Office and industry leaders ahead of the inquiry — Victorians have every right to ask why,” he said.

“We have concerns about how closely the government has been working with parts of the industry behind closed doors, particularly when so many Victorians feel shut out of planning decisions.”

A state government spokesperson tried to downplay the calls, saying staff kept in regular contact with all industry leaders.

Government ‘failed to acknowledge’ expert views

It comes as top planning figures accused the Allan government of a “failure to acknowledge expert views” and skipping broad community engagement in a brutal assessment of its new townhouse and low-rise apartment overhaul.

The state government’s bold plan to fast-track planning permits for townhouses up to three storeys and strip neighbours of their third party appeal rights in a major shake-up of the state’s residential code has been pulled apart by experts, with one warning it has not been “sufficiently, strategically justified” and could result in “contradictory or unforeseen ways”.

Senior planning experts were grilled during a parliamentary inquiry on Tuesday over new Victorian Planning Provisions that are expected to flood suburban Melbourne and with high, medium and low rise apartments, and townhouses.

Top planning figures accused the Allan government of failing to acknowledge expert views during the housing overhaul planning. Picture: NewsWire

The controversial plan to tackle the state’s housing crisis, announced by Premier Jacinta Allan and Planning Minister Sonya Kilkenny, has prompted severe backlash, leading the opposition to secure an inquiry into the radical proposals.

Experts said while the state’s residential code, otherwise known as ResCode, was due for an overhaul, the state government did not consult thoroughly with leading figures or communities.

Planning Institute of Australia president Patrick Fensham slammed the state government over a lack of consultation with experts, saying “perhaps haste has been prioritised over a demonstration of good planning principles and processes”.

“Engagement with experts in evidence based debate is critical to understanding whether the planning reforms are likely to work and whether they will therefore achieve their objectives,” he said.

The bold plan would fast-track planning permits for townhouses up to three storeys and strip neighbours of their third party appeal rights. Picture: NCA NewsWire

“We’ve been disappointed with the failure on (the residential townhouse and low-rise code) in particular, to acknowledge expert views and take those views … into account.

“We haven’t seen modelling, testing and evidence on the impact of the reforms, and that hasn’t been publicly aired.

He, however, said while the reforms “don’t guarantee delivery”, they were an “important marker for the market”.

“They provide the capacity for the market to provide additional housing,” he said.

“But we are concerned that because the reforms have not been sufficiently, strategically justified – and there’s a limit to the evidence base – that they may work in contradictory or unforeseen ways.

Mr Fensham suggested that the new townhouse code “may encourage quite intense development in not well located areas”.

Planning Minister Sonya Kilkenny and her team were accused of failing to acknolwedge expert views. Picture: NewsWire / Valeriu Campan

He also criticised the government for failing to introduce a mandate for more social and affordable housing.

“The devil is always in the detail,” he added to finish off his brutal opening remarks.

Planning Institute of Australia Vice President Jane Keddie also noted that there was “much broader engagement” and “detailed expert reviews” that were tested as part of previous codes under different governments.

Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute managing director Dr Michael Fotheringham, however, warned that if the state government did not progess with its bold agenda Victoria would end up like parts of Europe and Asia where “people aren’t sharing houses, they’re sharing bedrooms”.

Victorian Planning Environmental Law Association board president Mark Sheppard said the reforms would broadly help to increase infill housing and affordability, and would create some “certainty” for developers.

“But it’s not all roses,” he warned.

“There is potentially a risk around the lack of consideration of potential hazards, flooding and the like,” he added.

Planning and urban research experts both criticised and defended the state government’s bold housing plan.

Housing Institute of Australia Victorian executive director Keith Ryan said it was “important to stress” that the planning reforms “don’t by themselves ... fix the problem” and would need to be accompanied by “tax reform and regulation”.

Grattan Institute Program Director, Housing and Economic Security Brendan Coates, however, defended the state government’s housing plan, suggesting tax reforms were not necessary to stimulate enough development to meet a target of 800,000 new homes over a decade.

“I’m not sure I would take the position of the housing development industry at face value, that those taxes have quite the effect that they believe they have on housing,” he said.

Mr Coates said the reforms have “the potential to unlock hundreds of thousands of extra homes in the coming decades” in well serviced areas.

“And so we think the Victorian government should stay the course on these reforms,” he said.

A state government spokesperson said: “We make no apologies for our bold reforms that will boost housing supply – helping young Victorians who are struggling to find a home to buy or rent, close to their loved ones.”

Originally published as Questions raised over ‘cosy’ relationship between Allan government and planning industry