IBAC calls for Victorian councils to be stripped of planning decisions

Daniel Andrews is backing a bold plan to strip planning decisions from “part time councillors”, but has ruled out merging any of Victoria’s 79 councils.

IBAC has called on the state government to completely overhaul planning laws.

Daniel Andrews will push ahead with a bold plan to strip Victorian councils of the power to carry out major planning decisions, but says he has no plans to amalgamate local government.

The Premier said the “completely unacceptable” conduct at Casey Council, as exposed in IBAC’s Operation Sandon finding, likely wouldn’t have occurred if such decisions were instead made by senior planning officials who provide advice to ministers.

“That’s the direction that we are heading in … I reckon we can do more and do better to try and deal with that risk,” Mr Andrews said.

“What we’re talking about is trying to take as much risk out of some of those really highly lucrative positions where land goes from $5000 to $10,000 an acre to hundreds of thousands of dollars an acre.

“It won’t be zero risk, you can never build that system, but it would be a very much lower risk.

Daniel Andrews will support IBAC’s recommendation to sideline councils from planning decisions. Picture: Andrew Henshaw

“To have part time councillors making decisions to turn farmland into a new suburb, where you are talking about vast amounts of money, there’s clearly a risk that things can go wrong.”

Mr Andrews said he hadn’t yet given much thought on what threshold — either financial or size of land — would be used to determine who is in control of the planning decision.

He said he didn’t believe such an order would lead to Victoria’s 79 councils not having enough work to do.

“One of the big problems here is that there’s a lot of councillors who are just not making these decisions at all, like VCAT is having to make all their decisions because they refuse to say yes. They just say no, no, no all the way through, even though the council officers say you should do this,” he said.

Mr Andrews said he was “happy with the number of councils we’ve got” and amalgamating them was not on the government’s agenda.

He said the government would now take time to look through each of IBAC’s recommendations.

“We’ll consider it properly and it would be our aim to get on and deliver those 34 recommendations,” he said.

He slammed the opposition’s criticism of the government’s involvement in the scandal given the Liberal Party’s own dealings with Mr Woodman were also probed in the investigation.

“I’m not taking integrity lecturers from the opposition, just quietly,” Mr Andrews said.

“The people that were getting the bags of cash were Liberal Party councillors. They were sacked by our government.”

Dan backs IBAC’s call to strip council powers

IBAC called on the state government to completely overhaul planning laws and the local government sector in a bid to stamp out the potential for future corrupt dealings in the wake of the Casey Council scandal.

It has demanded Mr Andrews establish an interdepartmental task force, chaired by his department and made up of senior representatives from other relevant departments and agencies, to implement IBAC’s 34 recommendations.

The years-long investigation, exposed how planning decisions at a local and state government level were improperly influenced, or were at risk of undue influence through the manipulation of council governance processes, political donations and lobbying.

“Extensive reforms are necessary to minimise the risk of this behaviour occurring again and promote integrity in decision-making processes,” the report stated.

IBAC acting commissioner Stephen Farrow and deputy commissioner David Wolf. Picture: David Crosling

“The success of these reforms will depend on effective co-ordination by the Taskforce. It will also require the Victorian government to make a strong commitment to greater transparency and accountability in planning decisions.”

IBAC doubled down on its push to strengthen the state’s donation laws, recommending that consideration be given to banning high-risk groups, including property developers, from making political donations.

It also called for an overhaul to the regulation of lobbying, and for electorate officers to be appropriately supervised and given clear lines of accountability when the MP is on extended leave.

The bombshell report exposed that council processes weren’t strong enough to manage conflict of interests and prevent improper conduct, finding that in various circumstances City of Casey of Casey councillors “deliberately breached their obligations and failed to take responsibility for their conduct or that of other councillors”.

This has prompted calls for the Planning Minister to make legislative changes that would strip councillors of statutory planning responsibilities and instead give that power to independent planning panels.

All Victorian councillors should also undergo mandatory training on how to manage conflicts of interest and undertake refresher courses on governance, leadership and integrity in the middle of each term, the report recommended.

Councillors found to have behaved poorly should be subject to harsher penalties, including the prospect of becoming ineligible to be elected as mayor after a finding of misconduct, IBAC recommended.

The watchdog said its recommended changes are “necessarily ambitious”, but added: “In many instances, these reforms aim to bring Victoria’s controls for these risks up to the standard already in place in other Australian jurisdictions, while building on lessons learned elsewhere.”

Acting IBAC commissioner Stephen Farrow said the investigation highlighted how ministers, MPs, councillors and advisers can be targeted by lobbyists.

“Operation Sandon demonstrated that, as a group, councillors in the City of Casey exhibited and tolerated behaviour that did not meet the standards required of them,” he said.

“In the case of some councillors, this involved a conscious departure from those standards, while others demonstrated a poor understanding of their obligations as elected officials.”