We present below part of yesterday’s performance in Parliament by David Southwick. Obviously a follower of don’t let the facts get in the way of spin and political expediency!
“I want to relate to members a relevant example from my electorate. I refer to a park in the middle of Caulfield Racecourse. It is an area of open space I have been working on and which we are returning back to the community. It is Crown land, and we are creating five different precincts, including a sporting precinct, a jogging track and fishing areas, and enabling a whole range of different activities for the community. This park should be open now, and people should be using it. It was held up for 12 months. Why was it held up for 12 months? Because we had one lady—one person in the whole electorate —who took an issue about the park to VCAT. This individual did not like the surface that has been put forward for the jogging track. She wanted a hard surface, not a soft surface, believing a harder surface would be better for joggers. Needless to say, everyone has a right and a view, but when you look at this project you can see that it has taken up to 12 months to get going and you can think of all the individuals, families and other people in my electorate who have been unable to use that park because of one individual who took the matter to VCAT. She waited 12 months, and when the matter finally got to VCAT, guess what happened? She pulled out. She decided she was not going to go through with it. She had had second thoughts: ‘Maybe a soft track might be better after all’.
This is the sort of thing we need to fix up. We need to ensure that we have better, smoother and more consistent planning and that people understand where they stand right from the very beginning. The worst thing any government can deliver is uncertainty. The worst thing any government can deliver is a process in which one decision does not match a related decision simply because of whatever is decided on the day— because of the ‘It’ll be all right on the day’ attitude.”
Further on in his speech Southwick states – “I tell you what: the Labor opposition is very good at never letting the truth get in the way of a very good story”. What a pity that Southwick doesn’t practise what he preaches!
Glen Eira Debates 
September 13, 2012 at 12:08 PM
What a load of disgusting crap. According to this the objector is to blame for not fixing up Queens avenue and ripping down fences. She’s also to blame for the park at the top of Glen Eira rd being a dump. Southwick is a total turncoat. When he was electioneering then it was okay to spriuk his opposition to c60 and the centre. Now he has a go at a resident for doing what she’s entitled to do and on behalf of the whole community. I wish we had more like her then we’d get rid of all the rubbish that is now sitting in council and in parliament.
September 13, 2012 at 12:37 PM
If the MRC really wanted to, they could have the works all completed in a month before the Cup. But they do not feel the need when people like Southwick and Hyams don’t push them. The replacement of the tin fence by palisade didn’t require a permit and should have been long built. Again the MRC don’t see the need because Hyams and Southwick are sending mixed messages by no longer supporting voters. If Southwick and Hyams keep this up, they may as well go to their former illustrious careers of DJ and paperboy respectively(I kid you not).
September 13, 2012 at 5:37 PM
It is actually not the MRC holding off the fencing but Glen Eira Council. Council have yet to approve the design and are supposed to pay half. Newton and Burke have deliberately withheld this from Councillors and will try to hold off until the new council. Pilling is trying to get this out in the open. If you want a transparent Council vote Greens in October.
September 13, 2012 at 6:32 PM
All was spelled out in the joke of an “agreement”. It has not been honoured.
I’m also flabbergasted with your support of Pilling – the gang convert. If he is “trying to get this out in the open” then I’d rather vote for ET than Pilling. Keeping mum is the exact opposite of what he should be doing if your claim is correct. Newton and this toady councillors hate negative publicity, but at least that forces them to get off their arses and provide more spin that the public can reject. If Pilling is keeping his mouth shut then he should be condemned because that’s the exact opposite of open, transparent government – something he’s supposed to be supporting. But since he’s now become the newest member of the gang I very much doubt your claim. In fact rumour has it that after a little private phone conversation with none other than the CEO, Pilling suddenly changed his mind and voted for c60 and the 7 lot subdivision. That’s real open government isn’t it. Hey, Neil, what have you got to say for yourself on all this? Are you now shaking in your boots cos people have got long memories and you’re a failed aspirant for state government and will very soon be a failed aspirant for re-election.
September 13, 2012 at 12:46 PM
Have to disagree David – bad decisions are worse than uncertainty. I suspect the objector withdrew because she didn’t have the funds, energy or sufficiently thick skin to face the well resourced and connected MRC – NOT because her grounds were baseless. Getting slandered in the Vic parliament just goes to show what she was up against.
September 13, 2012 at 1:07 PM
Southwick is basically repeating what has already been said (and in much worse terms) within the Council Chamber. The ‘culprits’ – no prizes for guessing. Hyams and Esakoff!
September 13, 2012 at 1:12 PM
Southwick fails to give a timeline when the agreement will be actioned It was supposed to be 27 April 2012. That has long passed, but has an extension between approved by all parties? What is the new date. Surely not next year. The electorate needs answers not the rubbish provided to date.
September 13, 2012 at 11:55 PM
So that I can get this story straight, could somebody tell me what date the lady concerned actually filed her objection with VCAT? Was it before or after the so called April 2012 deadline for the park to be completed?
September 14, 2012 at 11:11 AM
Irrelevant. VCAT had nothing to do with fencing removal. The agreement said fencing was to be replaced with Pallisade by 27 April 2012. Nothing has happended. Sue the MRC and Council bastards who breached the agreement.
September 13, 2012 at 1:35 PM
I thought it was the other way around – the resident wanted a soft track made of crushed rock rather than concrete. Either way, surely David Southwicks time would be better spent by picking up the phone, calling the CEO of the MRC and getting some action happening. Talk is cheap and if nothing happens soon then Southwick and his staff will need to get on the phone to Centrelink to look for new jobs.
September 13, 2012 at 1:52 PM
Unlike other posters on this site, I do have some compassion for David. He has been fed rubbish by Hyams. However he should check the facts before mentioning untruths in the public arena. Also dont rely on Jamie Hyams for information!
September 13, 2012 at 2:10 PM
I’ve been looking at Hansard. All the speeches are about the Minister’s Planning reforms and all are woeful. Southwick’s is part of the overall take on what improvements the revised scheme will offer. His argument is basically that since there will now be “criteria” set down that permits will be issued according to these criteria and thus remove the situation where one resident may allegedly hold up projects. The argument and those from both sides of the house focus on trivialities. The central issues of giving more power to corrupt councils, councillors and administrators in the pockets of developers is completely overlooked. Instead there is argument after argument about fences, pagolas and so on. Nobody looks at what is really important such as the removal of objectiion rights and what “higher density” really means. The propaganda and mistruths that both sides present is unacceptable. Southwick is falling into line as is MP Miller in her little tirade. It would no doubt be welcome for all MPs to actually state the truth, or better still, to debate the central issues rather than grandstanding all the time.
September 13, 2012 at 4:15 PM
I was surprised Southwick would even mention Caulfield Racecourse such is the embarrassment this has caused him, however now I understand the context in which he spoke. Its a shame he has not been a greater advocate for the people of Caulfield. There are so many issues to assist but it seems he has turned into a stooge now that he has become elected.
September 13, 2012 at 6:10 PM
I was incensed when I read David Southwick’s comments. Apart from mangling facts and misleading Parliament, he has directly attacked an individual very unfairly in a manner in which she has no right of reply. He is also guilty of relying upon an unnamed, anonymous source without attribution and without basic fact-checking. Since Mayor Hyams has form on the matter, leading to a much-criticised front page of Caulfield Glen-Eira Leader, I wouldn’t be surprised if he played a part. What would really stun me is if David identified his source.
For the record, it is the MRC which has held up implementation of the entire Agreement. Most elements don’t require a Planning Permit, so there is no excuse for their failure to implement those elements. The “pathway” that was in dispute was originally described by the MRC as being dual-purpose including for vehicles, and so didn’t meet the definition of “pathway” in the Road Management Act. In May 2012 the MRC revealed that it had changed its plans and that it really was a pathway, thereby removing it from needing a Permit [citing s36.02-2]. Why the MRC waited until May has not been explained, not by the MRC, not by “our” Mayor, not by David Southwick. The matter never reached VCAT as a result of the late change of plan. Provided the MRC doesn’t need a Permit, it can pretty much do what it likes to our Public Park, just as it has since its original usurpation.
The access to our public park and public reserve has not been improved since the Agreement was signed—its still closed between 2:00pm and 4:30pm. There is no improvement of signage. Visitors exiting via the Queens Ave gate have to run the gauntlet of traffic because of Andrew Newton’s barriers. No new pallisade fencing has been installed. I’ve not heard of any consultation taking place either. We are still all dependent on the MRC’s grace and favour about ongoing maintenance of the facility that they very reluctantly are supposed to fund. The area remains windswept and desolate, with no trees. The State Government has shown no interest in improving the governance of the precinct, which is why it has been treated like a rubbish dump for 150 years. If the works for the Park had been done by or on behalf of Council, it would most likely be exempt from needing a Permit.
As if David, or any Member of Parliament for that matter, cares about our Park, or Planning in general.
September 13, 2012 at 9:33 PM
On ya Reprobate! Your too kind though. Parliament doesn’t give a stuff now that the mrc power brokers got their way and Newton for sure doesn’t give a stuff about planning for the good of residents and most of the dummies we’ve got for councillors wouldn’t even know what a structure plan is. They keep claiming that we’ve got structure plans. Shows how well they’ve swallowed the bullshit that Newton and Akehurst continue to feed them. Yup, it’s sure time for a change.
September 13, 2012 at 6:58 PM
For all those readers who have the intestinal fortitude to plough through the following diatribe (first bit left out) we present the MP Miller diatribe/spin from yesterday’s parliamentary sitting, with some comments at the end.
Members of my community in
Bentleigh come to me and ask why there is
inappropriate development going on in their
community and why people can come in and do what
they want. The reason is that those people are following
the previous government’s plan, Melbourne 2030,
which was an absolute farce. It was there for
government members’ mates and for cherry picking
development around Victoria. There was no plan,
strategy or vision. The member for Yuroke is now
disgusted with her performance and contribution and is
about to leave the chamber. That is a reflection of the
standing of the former government.
What is this government going to do? We have a plan
and a vision, and we are delivering for Victorians. We
are delivering on our commitment. We are going to
introduce a VicSmart plan. This will correct the shift
and deal with the straightforward and low-impact
applications quickly and efficiently. The changes will
not only apply to applications for high-rise and
high-density development, but also to the simple things.
What does that mean? It means that if a person wants to
build something simple like a fence or a shed, they can
do so. They are not going to have to wait months like
they would have had to do under the previous
government. It is going to be a shorter and simpler
process. It also means more cost efficiencies, because
that is what this Victorian government is all about. We
are about living within our means and looking after our
economy, and we are making sure that we can keep
things in order.
The simple process will take approximately 10 business
days as opposed to up to 60 days. Those who submit a
more complex planning application will know what
they have to submit and what criteria they must meet to
be successful. It will also mean that they will
understand the time it will take. That also means people
will not be clogging up the Victorian Civil and
Administrative Tribunal. They will not be kept in the
waiting line for 10 months if they want to build a shed,
as opposed to a multi-storey development. It is going to
be a simple process. We are going to be cutting the red
tape, and that is what Victorians are wanting.
This process will also reduce delays, as I said. Complex
proposals and straightforward proposals will be treated
differently. We are not imposing a one-size-fits-all
approach. When they were in government those on the
other side of the house seemed to think they could do
whatever they wanted and apply a one-size-fits-all
policy on those people wanting planning permission for
a simple fence that matched the streetscape or for a
shed—and men love their sheds. That assessment
process will no longer have to take 60 days or more.
Current statistics are that approximately 57 000 permit
applications are lodged in Victoria per year and
approximately 37 per cent of them are for things worth
no more than $50 000, yet the applicants have to wait
months for an assessment of their permit applications.
How much does that cost hardworking families? It is
ridiculous. The Kingston and Glen Eira councils in my
electorate have some planning applications before them
and this new policy will make things a lot simpler.
Requests for permits for simple projects will be able to
be gone through in a matter of two weeks, as opposed
to months, and that will mean cost savings. Those are
something the Labor Party does not understand. Labor
members do not understand how to manage money,
they do not understand the economy, and they do not
mind spending other people’s money. That is quite
interesting.
To return to a point I made earlier about the previous
Minister for Planning, there was an article about the
member for Essendon when he was planning minister
in the Age of 15 April 2010 titled ‘Madden changes
planning protocol’, which said:
… planning minister Justin Madden was left in the dark about
an application involving his first cousin.
We had a minister of the government of the day
involved in planning for the whole vision for Victoria
being left in the dark. After 11 long years Victoria was
left in the dark. Thank God that when they went to the
polls in 2010 Victorians saw the light, saw the vision of
Premier Ted Baillieu, saw the vision of Mr Guy—
Mr Super Guy—and that today we are in government
delivering a very clear, sound planning strategy and a
vision that is clear for Victorians. Victorians now know
where development is going. Certainly in the electorate
of Bentleigh, which is a very well-established area with
a lot of 1960s homes that young families are buying
and upgrading, people know. When those young
families want to put up a fancy fence or gate or want to
put an extension onto the back of their house or their
business on Centre Road, Bentleigh, they need go
through only a very simple process. They do not have
to waste money and they are not going to have to waste
time. They can get on with it and get the job done. That
is exactly what this government is doing: we are getting
on with it and getting the job done.
29 June, titled ‘Labor clueless on urban planning’:
The Victorian Labor Party appear clueless and erratic on state
planning policy, particularly about new VicSmart planning
laws, Minister for Planning Matthew Guy said today.
…
‘In what is becoming a regular occurrence, Labor’s Brian Tee
yet again has his facts wrong’.
Here we have an opposition that claims it knows better.
Guess what, Acting Speaker? It does not know any
better. Labor members are in the dark and they are
clueless. As the member for Yuroke said about
members on this side, those opposite are clowns.
We are doing the right thing by Victorians. We have a
vision, we have a plan, we are economically
responsible and we are going to live within our means. I
commend the bill to the house.
COMMENT: Pity that MP Miller doesn’t know that Melbourne 2030 is now dead and buried. Pity that MP Miller can with a straight face claim that all recent development in Bentleigh and East Bentleigh should be attributed to Labour and nothing to the present, or worse, nothing about Glen Eira’s discriminatory Planning Scheme. Pity that MP Miller can also with a perfectly straight face state that her constituents will now have ‘certainty’ in that “The changes will not only apply to applications for high-rise and high-density development, but also to the simple things”. We’ve seen this “certainty” with 20+ storeys okayed by this council and more and more high rise on the cards. Yes, that’s certainly certain.
September 13, 2012 at 11:14 PM
I know the objector and the lengths she has gone to in order to try and ensure that residents get a fair deal. Unlike so many of us who are prepared to sit back and whinge, this lady has put her money where her mouth is. At the vcat hearing on the subdivision she hired a barrister which probably cost her thousands of dollars. She didn’t have to do this, and god knows, she’s not flush with funds. But she was determined to at least try and get some justice and a decent hearing. She lost of course.
Then there was the centre of the racecourse. I’ve seen her objection and to me it made plenty of sense. She did her homework, running all over Melbourne to see how other councils dealt with pathways. She took photos of these alternate tracks, costed them, and backed this up with medical journal articles that showed how jogging on hard concrete injures people. She met with the MRC, and they were supposed to get back to her and organise another meeting. Of course they didn’t but literally ploughed ahead, with the acquiescence of this council to create their yellow concrete monstrosities throughout an area that is supposed to be a recreation and park land.
It’s incredibly easy to blame one individual as Hyams, Esakoff and now Southwick have done. Just because there is only one objection, doesn’t mean that the rest of the municipality accepts what is happening. I certainly don’t. But I was too lazy, and despondent, to write up a formal objection.
Ultimately she did withdraw her objection. Not because she thought she was wrong, or because the fire had left the belly. I suspect it was simply that the threat of paying out the mrc’s legal costs, which I’ve no doubt they would have tried, was a risk too great to take. Idealism and a social conscience can come at a great cost when you’re fighting unscrupulous councils and a mega industry who don’t care one little bit about who they want to crush and how much it will cost. For council, they simply put their hands into our pockets. For the mrc, well they got Napthine and the whole damn government supporting them.
Southwick’s, Hyams and Esakoff’s attacks are totally without foundation and tell us more about them and their dirty tactics, than they do about the objector. She should be awarded the Citizen of The Year!
September 14, 2012 at 3:30 PM
Mary, the objector says,,
Mr Southwick apparently misread all material regarding the surface which I favoured. He apparently did not read the VCAT files or a letter I personally delivered to him and 90 or so politicians.
I appealed to VCAT in the hope we could negotiate an alternative but the MRC did not call a second meeting although I carried out much research on the matter.
Acccording to scientific evidence in studies which I made all over Australia in many park surface providers and sporting experts there is a definite opinion that conmcrete surfaces should be avoided for jogging and running. This area of our parkland is now a concrete area which represents .6 hectare or about ten house sites worth $4 million.
I also objected to the many kilometres of fencing now constructed.
Now to the community, I most add that I was extremely disappointed at having to withdraw but I was advised that a loss may have cost me tens of thousands of dollars.
September 14, 2012 at 11:51 PM
Not only has Southwick misrepresented the situation, (MODERATORS: this section of the sentence deleted) and he can get away with it under parliamentary privilege. If Southwick doesn’t read this blog, I’m sure some of his supporters do. I’d suggest that they tell him to post his explanation here so the community can judge whether he has let them down. Or perhaps he simply doesn’t have the gumption.
September 16, 2012 at 10:21 PM
I also wish to add my support for up-standing citizen Mary’s efforts on our behalfs.The low easy implied -slur by Southwick, supposedly OUR rep., of misrepresenting her view -, esp, when he said he’d act for residents rights on the racecourse changes ,BEFORE elected,- says alot on the true values of these people: when they get into power & act in their own self interests with the big power brokers.
September 17, 2012 at 5:10 PM
Whose fault is it if the trains run slow or the VCAT hearings take so long?
If the government had been interested in the citizens and even developers then it should have increased the hearing capacity of the VCAT. The trains have been changed by short circuiting the loop. Has any interest been shown in changing the stystem at VCAT? And now the simple exercise of citizen’s’ rites is completely being stolen.
And interestingly enough from the reading most of the development in Melbourne is being financed by Chinese companies which are owned generally by the Chinese govenment. If China collapses that will save this set of monstroies being built on the open space.
AND OH ANY FOREIGN NATIONALS ARE ALLOWED TO BUY WHOLE BL0CKS OF RESIDENTIALS SUCH AS IN DUDLEY STREET EAST CAULFIELD. So guess who will be living mostly at the Village?
Now it is of interest that THE AGE has withdrawn sponsorchip of the Guineas and it is to be sponsoredby THE CAULFIELD VILLAGE.
Maybe the Melbourne Racing Club will face financial ruin just as the West Australian Racing Club did due to the Alistair Roberrtson developments. His housing did not sell. BUT THEN THE 780 POKER MACHINES AND CONCESSIONAL TAXES ON THEM MAY SAVE THE MRC.
Oh well we can only thank ou council and, our political represenmtatives and our parliaments for allowing this to forge ahead with such enthusiasm.
Many buildings such as those planned were well on the way in Ireland until their crash and they had to be knocked over with bulldozers and cranes.
Time alone will tell.