Media Releases 2013
Council submission on VCAT fee regulations
18 Feb 2013
Stonnington Mayor, Cr Matthew Koce has made a submission to the State Government Department of Justice on behalf of Stonnington Council in relation to proposed VCAT fee increases.
The submission responded to the Regulatory Impact Statement for proposed VCAT fees regulation, released in December 2012.
Cr Koce said: “Council is concerned that several of the fee increases proposed appear out of step with the key objectives of the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal which is to provide the community with access to a civil justice system which is both accessible and cost-effective.
“In particular, fee increases for ‘objector appeals’ and mediation will be particularly hard on ordinary residents, who unlike property developers, are unable to claim the cost of VCAT fees as a tax deduction or business expense. These proposed fee increases are substantial and risks placing the justice system beyond the reach of many Victorians.
“Cost-effective dispute resolution is, and must remain, a fundamental objective of VCAT because VCAT was established to provide affordable and fair access to justice for the whole Victorian community.”
Mayor, Cr Koce said: “Council is concerned that the Regulatory Impact Statement mentioned VCAT could introduce mediation fees – to be set at a level equivalent to 45 per cent of the estimated cost of carrying out the activity.
“Increased fees should not be imposed for mediation. Mediation provides a useful tool in resolving issues without the formality of a hearing, coupled with obvious time and cost savings to all parties. Increasing such fees may dissuade participants to utilise this option.”
However, no objections were proposed in relation to VCAT fee increases for major cases, large scale developments and enforcement orders relating to breaches of the Planning Scheme.
Cr Koce said: “The fee increases for some permit applicants appear relative to the cost of a larger development. It is considered appropriate that this fee is increased based on the cost of the development (i.e. increasing after both $1m and $5m) – which is generally proportionate to the resources required to deal with the matter.”
He said that in terms of Enforcement Orders, Council took no objection to a fee increase as Council can recoup such costs as part of such applications to the Tribunal (in the instance of successfully being able to establish a breach of the Planning Scheme).
The submission letter is available on the Stonnington website at www.stonnington.vic.gov.au/news-and-information/whats-new
Media Contact: Media and Communications Coordinator T: (03) 8290 1113 M: 0408 523 708
Glen Eira Debates 
February 19, 2013 at 12:44 PM
Not a peep from council about this fee hike. No surprise when all efforts are directed to getting more high density into the place instead of worrying about justice for residents. Good to see that Stonnington publishes its submissions not like you know who.
February 19, 2013 at 1:29 PM
Justice is already favouring those with large bank accounts. This will reinforce the inequities that exist. Very few residents would be able, much less willing to spend over one thousand dollars when they know that they will be up against queen’s councils, planning experts, and an assorted bevy of developer witnesses. It’s a further demonstration of the diminuition of the public’s accessibility to both justice and the right of protest.
February 19, 2013 at 2:49 PM
I am reminded of that lady in Caulfield North fighting the MRC development in Kambrook road. Not only was she threatened with bankruptcy but Hyams and Southwick both laid the boots in while she was down.
February 19, 2013 at 3:32 PM
Residents should get ready for one of the biggest rate hikes in the municipalities history we feel given this latest blow to the budget –
Landfill site’s emissions costs eastern councils carbon tax
Greg Gliddon
From: Progress Leader
February 19, 2013 12:02PM
BOROONDARA and Stonnington Councils are among five Melbourne councils to be added to the Carbon Tax big polluters list due to their part ownership in the Clayton South Landfill site.
Access all Areas. $1 for the first 28 days. Only $2.95 a week thereafter. Learn more.
Boroondara and Stonnington have been joined by Whitehorse, Glen Eira and Monash, which have been included on the Liable Entities List for facilities with greater than 25,000 tonnes of CO2 emissions.
Shadow Climate Change spokesperson Greg Hunt said the councils will be liable for emissions from rubbish at the site, backdated to July 1, last year.
Kooyong Federal Liberal MP Josh Frydenberg said the carbon tax would be a big hit to the budgets of families and small businesses in Kooyong.
“Worse still the carbon tax will only go up and up at a time when no other competing country around the world is imposing such an economy wide tax,” Mr Frydenberg said.”
Add to this the Employee Superannuation charges, and the Fire services levy, we will be astounded is the rate increases aren’t up around 8 to 9%. This of course doesn’t include charges!
February 19, 2013 at 8:20 PM
If you take any notice of the polling on the federal election then you should not worry about the carbon tax. The Liberal policy is to abandon it. Regardless of the numbers in the Senate with an Abbott Governement the ALP will support its removal as it was a Greensparty policy that was foisted onto Prime Minister Gillard.
February 19, 2013 at 8:42 PM
We will just have to wait and see. Remember the old political adage – once a tax is on the books it stays there!
February 20, 2013 at 2:27 PM
The carbon tax is not really a tax. It was not designed to raise cash for the government. It is the prelude to a cap and trade system. As it appears now the big winners are the ppwer generating companies. The government gave out huge lumps of cash that qent straight in their pocket.
February 19, 2013 at 10:17 PM
Mary says to Viewfromahill, Thanks for your support in my effort to try and bring about a better outcome for the good of residents.
The people who say they represent us in parliament and the Caulfield White house all seem to have other interests. Mr Southwick even stated my aims falsely and though I wrote to ninety politicians, stating the robbery of two thirds of a hectare and turning it into a hard surface so that cars could travel across these paths, they all sat and listened.
I have chatted with other politicians and once they find you live in another electorate they are quick to say talk to the Caulfield member. What a waste of breathe that would be.
Now you will all be pleased to hear that the MRC has now spent only $2.9 million on a very special track for the horses to run on, in our park, but the miserable effort for the GE residents is still on the way. The horses will run injury free on soft tracks, but the humans will injure themselves extensively on this concrete running track, supported to the hilt by our gang of non-representative councillors.
As for the white house party, all nine are of a single mind, I don’t know why we pay all nine of them for so called independent thought!
The greatest waste of money ever.
More recently I asked for another swap with the priviledged MRC laneway (90metres) for land on the corner of Normanby Road and Heywood Street.
This would have a reasonable amount of land if added to the normal splayed corner and the footpath and service strips areas. But of course our representatives thought it too small etc.
It would have been definitely better than nothing, which is what the 10,000 daily dwellers, shoppers and visitors to the C60 are currently going to receive.
My name printed for the whole world to see so as to discourage others attempting ideas simply for the sake of future generations.This hasn’t been done for any other submitters.
Just ANOTHER WASTE OF TIME AND MONEY PRESENTING IT TO OUR GREENS REPRESENTATIVES!!!!!!!
There’s now even more daylight park robbery in Bailey Reserve. In Glen Eira, asphalt and concrete will always win over grass.
And of the famed GESAC, this requires a ticket of two zones and a walk of an hour to get there from Caulfield North where we pay the highest rates to help pay the debt as well.
Also, when I and another residents tried to obtain entry to the racecourse through the tunnel to the north of track the stench of horse manure was overwhelming. This is good enough for residents though!
At the VCAT hearing where I was an objector, Glen Eira Council planners and MRC seemed to have been allowed to change the case in secret and we were never told of a change in the contents of the case until we arrived at the VCAT hearing. How fair thought is all that?
I will not go to my grave feeling I have not tried to make the world a better place for the residents of GLEN EIRA ANYWAY
Mary