Wednesday, 11 September 2024

Transport Infrastructure and Planning Legislation Amendment Bill 2024

Statement of compatibility

Danny PEARSON (Essendon – Minister for Transport Infrastructure, Minister for the Suburban Rail Loop, Assistant Treasurer, Minister for WorkSafe and the TAC) (11:12): In accordance with the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006, I table a statement of compatibility in relation to the Transport Infrastructure and Planning Legislation Amendment Bill 2024:

In accordance with section 28 of the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006 (the Charter), I make this statement of compatibility with respect to the Transport Infrastructure and Planning Legislation Amendment Bill 2024 (the Bill).

In my opinion, the Bill, as introduced to the Legislative Assembly, is compatible with the human rights protected by the Charter. I base my opinion on the reasons outlined in this statement.

Overview of the Bill

The main purposes of this Bill are:

• to amend the Major Transport Projects Facilitation Act 2009 (the MTPF Act):

• in relation to the making of major transport project declarations;

• in relation to the delegation and sub-delegation of project authority functions and powers;

• to provide for new, and expand existing, project delivery powers;

• to amend the Planning and Environment Act 1987 (the PE Act) to provide for the delivery of precinct projects utilising the project powers under the MTPF Act;

• to amend the Road Management Act 2004 (the RM Act) in relation to the classification of roads for the purposes of that Act;

• to amend the Suburban Rail Loop Act 2021 (the SRL Act) in relation to the cessation of functions and powers on completion of a Suburban Rail Loop project; and

• to amend the Transport Integration Act 2010 to clarify the power of Secretary to the Department of Transport and Planning to enter into contracts for and behalf of the State.

These reforms are intended to provide for enhanced efficiency and flexibility and reduce administrative burden in the delivery of transport projects, including with respect to project declaration requirements and interfaces with utilities. The Bill further aims to provide a consistent approach to the delivery of declared precinct projects and enable project authorities to better manage project infrastructure and acquisition.

Human rights issues

The Bill engages a number of rights under the Charter, including the right to privacy (section 13(a)); the right to property (section 20); cultural rights (section 19) and the right to freedom of movement (section 12).

Power to enter, occupy, use and carry out works on land

Clause 22 inserts a new Subdivision into Division 7 of Part 6 of the MTPF Act to empower a project authority or authorised persons to enter occupy and use land within the project area for an approved project and carry out works on that land for the construction of permanent infrastructure (new section 165P). Clause 23 amends the MTPF Act to empower the project authority or authorised persons to enter, occupy, use and carry out works on certain land for any purpose connected with an approved project, in addition to for the purposes of an approved project (section 167). Clause 26 substitutes section 186(1) of the MTPF Act to empower a project authority or authorised person to enter, occupy and use a road for the purposes of an approved project or any purpose connected with the approved project.

Clause 45 of the Bill inserts new section 201QO into the PE Act to empower authorised persons to enter land to carry out surveys or investigations for the purposes of, or connected to, development planning or assessing development feasibility or costs, or in preparation for the declaration of a precinct project. The exercise of these powers may include activities such as digging or boring into the land, and taking samples of soil, rock, ground water or minerals. Entry onto land and activities under these powers may occur before a precinct project is declared, to determine whether the land should be included in the project area or is suitable for the purposes of the project.

Right to privacy

Section 13 of the Charter provides that a person has the right to not have their privacy, family, home or correspondence unlawfully or arbitrarily interfered with. An interference will be lawful if it is permitted by a law which is precise and appropriately circumscribed, and will be arbitrary only if it is capricious, unpredictable, unjust or unreasonable, in the sense of being disproportionate to the legitimate aim sought.

A person’s ‘home’ includes a person’s place of residence. Therefore, entry onto private property may, depending on the type and use of the private property, constitute an interference with the privacy of home. While the nature of interference may be less severe than an entry into a person’s private residence (e.g., inside their home), the use, occupation and conduct of any works on private land will increase the extent of the interference. For example, entry onto private land for the purpose of constructing permanent infrastructure is highly likely to amount to a deprivation of an occupier’s right to exercise autonomy over their property. Works may also limit an occupant’s quiet enjoyment of their home owing to the temporary establishment and storage of plant, machinery, equipment, goods or temporary buildings on their land, and to nuisances such as noise from the operation of such plant, machinery or equipment.

This being so, any interference with a property owner’s privacy of home is lawful and not arbitrary as it is authorised by legislation and subject to various statutory limitations. The power to enter, occupy, use and carry out works on land under new section 165P may only be exercised if the project authority intends to compulsorily acquire at least the part of the land on which the permanent infrastructure is to be constructed and it is not practicable to precisely identify the area of land for that infrastructure before the construction works are commenced. New sections 165R and 201QO impose a range of obligations on authorised persons entering onto land, including, to cause as little harm and inconvenience as possible; to not stay on the land for any longer than is reasonably necessary; to remove from the land all plant, machinery, equipment, goods or temporary buildings brought onto the land by the authorised person, and to the extent possible, leave it in the condition in which it was found. Moreover, the powers of entry are subject to strict notice requirements (new sections 165Q and 201QO), and requirements to prepare a condition report for occupied land (new section ‍165S). As such, any interference with a person’s privacy or home occasioned by clauses 22, 23 and 45 of the Bill is authorised by legislation that is precise and appropriately circumscribed and proportionate to the legitimate aims sought by those provisions, such that they are lawful and not capable of being exercised arbitrarily. The obligations imposed on authorised persons entering onto private land under these new provisions have as their purpose to limit, as far as possible, any interference on the property owner’s rights and constitutes the least restrictive means reasonably available to achieve the Bill’s purpose. Accordingly, the interference with property owners’ right to privacy has a legitimate purpose and is not arbitrary nor unlawful and I am therefore satisfied that the right to privacy is not limited by these clauses.

Right to property

Section 20 of the Charter provides that a person must not be deprived of their property other than in accordance with law. ‘Property’ under the Charter includes all real and personal property interests recognised under the general law, including contractual rights, leases and debts. A deprivation of property will not be limited to situations of forced transfer or extinguishment of title or ownership but will extend to any substantial restriction on a person’s exclusive possession, use or enjoyment of their property.

The powers to enter, occupy, use and carry out investigations, surveys and works on private land are likely to interfere with the property rights of persons who are by this activity deprived of the exclusive possession, use and enjoyment of their land.

However, the right to property will only be limited where a person is deprived of property ‘other than in accordance with the law’. For a deprivation of property to be ‘in accordance with the law’, the law must be publicly accessible, clear and certain, and must not operate arbitrarily. A broad, discretionary power capable of being exercised arbitrarily or selectively may fail to satisfy these requirements. In this instance, the interference will not be arbitrary, but governed by a clear and accessible process set out in the Bill and subject to reasonable conditions. For example, prior to exercising entry powers to undertake surveys or investigations under new section 201QO, the owner or occupier must, unless their consent has been obtained or in the event of an emergency, be provided with seven days’ notice of the entry (subsections (3)-(5)). Strict time limits and other conditions apply to entry powers (subsections (6)-(7)) to ensure that the interference with a person’s property is the least restrictive possible whilst also ensuring the necessary functions are carried out.

Further, in relation to powers of entry and occupation under new section 165P, in addition to the extensive safeguards outlined above, rent may be payable to persons who would be entitled to exclusive possession but for the project authority’s occupation of that land (new section 165U). Persons may also be entitled to compensation for pecuniary loss or expenses arising as a direct, natural or reasonable consequence of the entry or occupation of land (new sections 165Z and 165ZB). These provisions demonstrate that any deprivation of property that occurs as a result of the new provisions inserted by the Bill is not arbitrary and will be in accordance with the law. I therefore consider that these clauses are compatible with the right to property.

Cultural rights (s 19)

Section 19(2) of the Charter provides that Aboriginal persons hold distinct cultural rights and must not be denied the right, with other members of their community, to enjoy their identity and culture, maintain their distinctive spiritual, material and economic relationship with the land and waters and other resources with which they have a connection under traditional laws and customs. This section protects a person’s exercise of these rights with other members of their community.

Section 19 does not distinguish between Aboriginal persons who live on the land with which they have a connection under traditional laws and customs and those who are not residents on the land, but who nevertheless maintain a distinctive spiritual, material and economic relationship with that land.

The rights under section 19(2) are to be read broadly and are concerned not only with the preservation of the cultural, religious and linguistic identity of particular cultural groups, but also with their continued development. Aboriginal cultural rights are inherently connected to the relevant community and the traditions, laws and customs of that community. It can include traditional ways of life including practice of spiritual traditions, custom and ceremonies, and the maintenance of a cultural connection with land, including the use of natural resources and the preservation of historical sites and artefacts. Further, Aboriginal cultural rights co-exist with, and may extend beyond, rights in other legislative schemes, including the Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006, Traditional Owner Settlement Act 2010 and Native Title Act 1993 (Cth).

However, protection of cultural rights is not absolute. According to the UN Human Rights Committee, measures having only limited impact on the way of life of persons belonging to particular cultural groups will not necessarily amount to a denial of their rights. This suggests that only a substantial restriction on the enjoyment by particular cultural groups of their culture will be incompatible with the right.

To the extent that the powers to enter, use, occupy or conduct investigations, surveys or works relate to public land with which Aboriginal persons have a connection under traditional laws and customs, they may affect the enjoyment of cultural rights. However, as only substantial restrictions would limit section 19(2), powers authorising entry onto land for site survey purposes are unlikely to constitute a significant restriction.

By contrast, works such as the construction of permanent infrastructure may impact on the rights of Aboriginal persons to access the land and engage in activities that represent an essential element of their culture. However, the Minister and the relevant project authority, when considering such matters as whether to acquire certain land or designate a specific project area, will pursuant to section 38(1) of the Charter, be required to give proper consideration to, and act in a way that is compatible with, human rights, including cultural rights under section 19(2) of the Charter. That is, the project authority will have to consider whether the exercise of its powers in respect of certain land interferes with Aboriginal persons right to distinctive spiritual, material and economic relationships with the land and if so, the countervailing interest for doing so and whether the impact of such decision is justified and appropriate in the circumstances.

Accordingly, the Bill does not, in my view, limit the cultural rights under section 19(2) of the Charter.

Right to freedom of movement

Section 12 of the Charter provides that every person lawfully within Victoria has the right to move freely within Victoria. The right extends, generally, to freedom to move throughout the State without impediment or restrictions (both physical and procedural) and a right to access public places and services. This right is however not an absolute right under the Charter and may be subject to such reasonable limitations as are demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society, including the property rights of others.

To the extent that the powers under sections 165P, 167, 186(1) and 201QO are concerned with public land, powers of occupation, use, works and investigations may, depending on the circumstances of the occupation, use, works or investigation, interfere with the right to freedom of movement where they exclude public access to public places. As discussed in relation to cultural rights, the public authority, when considering such matters as whether to acquire certain land or designate a specific project area, will pursuant to section 38(1) of the Charter, be required to give proper consideration to, and act in a way that is compatible with, human rights, including the right to freedom of movement under section 12 of the Charter. That is, the project authority will have to consider whether the exercise of its powers in respect of certain land, excludes public access to public places, and if so, the countervailing interest for doing so and whether the impact of such decision is justified and appropriate in the circumstances.

Accordingly, the Bill does not, in my view, limit the right to freedom of movement under section 12 of the Charter.

Extinguishment of acquired easements

Clause 20 of the Bill inserts new section 116A in the MTPF Act. Section 116A provides that an interest in land described in a notice of acquisition as a right in the nature of an easement (or purporting to be an easement) is extinguished immediately on publication of the notice in the Government Gazette. The power applies to easements over both private and public land and operates to divest or diminish any interest that a person has in that land, to the extent necessary to give effect to the extinguishment.

Right to property

As above, for the purposes of section 20 of the Charter, ‘property’ includes all real and personal property interests recognised under the general law. An easement is a real property interest, and any extinguishment of an easement right will therefore interfere with the property right of persons whose interest in land are affected.

However, any deprivation of land that is in the nature of an easement, will under section 116A be governed by a clear and accessible process and the lawfulness of an extinguishment is subject to judicial review. Further, a person whose right in the nature of an easement has been extinguished, may be eligible for compensation in accordance with the rules for compensation set out in the Land Acquisition and Compensation Act 1986 (section 113, MTPF Act). Accordingly, any interference with a person’s property right that results from an extinguishment of an acquired easement under section 116A, is in accordance with law. As such, I consider that the right to property is not limited by these provisions.

Road declaration amendments

Clause 32 of the Bill substitutes section 193 of the MTPF Act to update, extend and clarify the limits of existing road declaration powers and confer these powers on the project authority instead of the Project Minister. This includes a new power to designate certain land as an ancillary area to be maintained by a responsible road authority as ancillary to a public road. New section 193 also provides that the project authority’s power to declare a road under section 193(1) is limited to relevant land, which is defined to include project land, land within the project area that is owned by the project authority, land that is under the management and control of the project authority or Crown land. New section 193(6) imposes a requirement for the project authority to obtain written consent of certain persons if the relevant land falls under certain categories. This inclusion is, in part, to prevent any privately owned land from being declared to be a road or an ancillary area without first obtaining the consent of the owner of the land. This clause aims to ensure that a person is not deprived of their private property interests without the appropriate safeguarding mechanisms for the divesting of property rights, such as notice requirements and compensation.

Right to property

As above, private property is protected by section 20 of the Charter, and any deprivation of a person’s property interests will interfere with their property rights. Clause 32 promotes the right to property by ensuring that that the project authority’s power to declare a road or ancillary area under section 193(1) is limited to certain categories of land and subject to specified consent requirements.

Cultural rights (s 19)

The power to designate certain land as an ancillary area may engage cultural rights under section 19(2) of the Charter to the extent that the designations relate to public land with which Aboriginal persons have a connection under traditional laws and customs. However, as only substantial restrictions would affect the enjoyment of cultural rights so as to limit section 19(2), designation powers are unlikely to constitute a significant restriction. Further, the project authority, when considering whether to designate a specific project area, will pursuant to section 38(1) of the Charter, be required to give proper consideration to, and act in a way that is compatible with, human rights, including cultural rights under section 19(2) of the Charter. Accordingly, the Bill does not, in my view, limit the cultural rights under section 19(2) of the Charter.

Community asset agreements

Clause 25 inserts new section 185D which empowers the project authority to enter into an agreement with a Council or a public authority for a community asset. A community asset may include activity-related infrastructure such as basketball courts, play equipment and skateparks, as well as bins, bus stops, car parks, furniture including park benches, retaining walls, pedestrian bridges, crossings, footpaths and signs. An asset could also potentially include other things that are not activity related, such as gardens, landscaping, drainage, lighting and fencing. The new provision would apply with respect to unreserved and reserved Crown land. An agreement may relevantly provide for rights and obligations in relation to the community asset, including liability and ownership of the asset to be transferred.

Right to property

The transfer of community assets, rights and liabilities from the Crown to Councils or public authorities is relevant to the property rights of natural persons who hold an interest in the liability transferred. However, the transfer of the liability from the Crown to a Council or public authority will not limit the property rights of persons holding the interest as they are not being deprived of their interest in the liability, rather the liability is transferred without altering the substantive content of that liability.

Insofar as a cause of action in relation to any potential liability held by the State may be considered ‘property’ within the meaning of section 20 of the Charter, clause 25 may engage this right. However, in my opinion, clause 25 does not effect a deprivation of property as it does not extinguish any cause of action which a person may have against the State. Rather, liability is transferred to the Council or public authority.

Finally, even if the Bill could be considered to deprive a person of property, any such deprivation would be ‘in accordance with law’ and will therefore not limit the Charter right to property. In particular, new Subdivision 5 of Division 7 of Part 6 of the MTPF Act, dealing with the community asset agreements more generally, is drafted in clear and precise terms, and is sufficiently accessible to allows persons to regulate their own conduct in relation to it.

Identification of ‘authorised persons’

Right to privacy

Clause 45 of the Bill inserts a new Part 9AB into the PE Act which includes a new section 201QP. New section 201QP requires a person authorised to enter land for the purposes of new section 201QO to be issued with an identity card containing a photograph. Section 201QO(7)(a) requires such authorised persons to identify themselves when entering land by producing their identity card. This clause may interfere with authorised persons’ right to privacy by requiring them to disclose their name and status as an authorised person in specified circumstances.

However, the interference with privacy is neither unlawful nor arbitrary, as it is a proportionate and necessary measure to ensure that persons dealing with authorised persons are able to identify them, as well as providing some protection against people fraudulently claiming to be authorised persons and purporting to exercise their powers.

The Hon Danny Pearson MP

Minister for Transport Infrastructure

Second reading

Danny PEARSON (Essendon – Minister for Transport Infrastructure, Minister for the Suburban Rail Loop, Assistant Treasurer, Minister for WorkSafe and the TAC) (11:12): I move:

That this bill be now read a second time.

I ask that my second-reading speech be incorporated into Hansard.

Incorporated speech as follows:

Overview

The main purpose of this Bill is to continue the Government’s strong commitment to develop and deliver Priority Precincts and major transport projects. The Government recognises the need to deliver planning and other related reforms to unlock benefits for Victorians for years to come. It is in the public interest to develop the infrastructure and places that are needed to provide Victorians with better housing, transport, employment opportunities and access to services and amenities.

We are reimaging and activating landmark precincts to create places where people have vibrant, liveable and sustainable communities, affordable housing and quality jobs which help to grow Victoria’s economy. These include precincts such as Arden, Docklands, Fishermans Bend, Footscray, East Werribee, Parkville and Sunshine.

We are also building and delivering important transport projects that will slash travel times and help to keep Victorians moving. These projects include the Suburban Rail Loop, North East Link, the Level Crossing Removal Project and the West Gate Tunnel Project.

To support the planning, development and delivery of these key projects, this Bill will enhance the government’s ability to develop and deliver Priority Precincts, reducing time, cost and risks. This Bill will also support the effective and efficient delivery of Priority Precincts, the Suburban Rail Loop and all other major transport projects through improvement of delivery powers and other related powers.

Improving precinct development to reduce time, cost and risks

An extra 3.6 million people are forecast to live in Victoria by 2051. This is a state where people want to live, work and study. However, Victorians are finding it harder to locate housing close to where they work, and commute times are increasing for many. We need to create a better way to deliver the housing and infrastructure Victorians need where they need it.

The reforms in this Bill will amend the Planning and Environment Act 1987 to enable the Premier to declare a development or proposed development, or a works program or proposed works program, to be a precinct project, and to describe the area of land that will be used for that project. We recognise that precincts will be planned, developed and delivered progressively in stages. The Bill therefore refers to the progressive development of precincts and makes provision for the component parts, including transport infrastructure, to be declared as precinct projects.

The effect of the declaration will be that the precinct project is deemed to be an approved project under the Major Transport Projects Facilitation Act 2009. The Premier’s declaration will also specify the Project Minister and the project authority. The project area described in the declaration will be deemed to be a project area under the Major Transport Projects Facilitation Act 2009. These provisions will provide the Project Minister and the project authority with the project delivery powers in the Major Transport Projects Facilitation Act 2009 that are needed to deliver precinct projects.

The Bill will also amend the Planning and Environment Act 1987 to provide the Secretary to the Department of Transport and Planning with powers to prepare for the development of a precinct project. These include powers to carry out early investigations and interface with utilities.

The Bill also amends the Transport Integration Act 2010 to clarify that the Secretary to the Department of Transport and Planning can enter into contracts for and on behalf of the State in relation to land for a proposed Priority Precinct prior to the declaration of a precinct project. These powers already exist with respect to transport related projects.

Modernising powers to better fit precincts and major transport projects

The Government is carefully planning to ensure the areas around Suburban Rail Loop stations will be ready to meet the needs of our growing population. We are planning to ensure these areas benefit from an improved range of infrastructure and services, providing better connections to jobs, open space and community facilities ‍– all on the doorstep of world-class public transport.

Drawing on the learnings from the Suburban Rail Loop, we know that having fit-for-purpose powers in place from the beginning of a precinct project or major transport project is essential. Informed by practice, we are aiming to reduce development inefficiencies and provide enhanced outcomes for the community with greater places to live, work, visit, study and shop.

To achieve these outcomes, the Bill modernises the definition of ‘non-transport infrastructure’ in the Major Transport Projects Facilitation Act 2009 so that it is compatible with the requirements and needs of delivering major transport projects and precincts around major transport projects. These components could include open spaces and parks and gardens, which are not an obvious fit within the existing definition but which are essential to a harmonious urban environment. The amendments to the definition also allow the infrastructure to be separated by unrelated buildings which is likely to occur in infrastructure developments in a precinct.

The Bill also amends the Major Transport Projects Facilitation Act 2009 to enable a program of works approach to the delivery of Priority Precincts and major transport projects. This will allow for a declaration of a group of related, but independent, projects that are to be delivered in one program of works. To support this change, it also provides for the progressive designation of a project area in stages where different parts of the project area are not ‘in the vicinity’ of each other. This could include a series of level crossing removals along one train line, or the development of a large-scale precinct in stages.

Enabling the declaration of a program of works, rather than individual projects, will better reflect the way Government develops, assesses and announces projects and will save time and costs in the delivery of such projects. However, it will not affect requirements for each project in each project area to receive the necessary approvals assessed according to the applicable legal criteria.

The Bill also empowers the Premier to add scope to an existing declared major transport project, on the recommendation of the Project Minister. The additional scope can only be added up until the point the project becomes an approved project under the Major Transport Projects Facilitation Act 2009. The Major Transport Projects Facilitation Act 2009 currently empowers the Premier to declare a transport project to be a declared project to which the Major Transport Projects Facilitation Act 2009 applies. However, at times, there is a need to later include additional scope in the project which was not foreseen at the time of the project declaration. This additional scope is often not significant enough to be declared a project on its own and often has some connection to an existing project, such as adding a carpark to a level crossing removal project.

Together, these changes will support more timely and effective delivery of precinct projects and major transport projects in accordance with state government priorities.

Improving community asset ownership for better community outcomes

The Government is not just building the transport infrastructure we need for the future – we are creating public spaces and places that will leave a long-lasting legacy for Victoria. As part of the development of our major transport projects, we have delivered a range of community assets to improve the amenity and safety of the surrounding area. These assets include basketball courts, play equipment, skateparks, bins, car parks, footpaths, shared used paths, pedestrian bridges, park benches and retaining walls and signs.

While development authorities construct community infrastructure and assets, these assets need to be owned, operated or maintained by other appropriate agencies and bodies. In most cases, municipal councils have been identified as the appropriate body to operate and maintain the community assets.

For community assets constructed on freehold land, arrangements have been made by which the project authority transfers asset ownership to councils by transfer deed. However, in the case of community assets constructed on Crown land, there is no current legal mechanism available to transfer responsibility for these assets.

To enable the transfer of community assets on Crown land to other public agencies, the Bill provides for powers enabling project authorities to enter agreements and arrangements that are necessary to ensure the legal transfer of ownership of assets. The land will remain Crown land and councils will be able to maintain and govern use of the assets for the benefit of the community.

Enhancing delivery powers to provide more efficient and targeted project outcomes

The Bill makes a range of amendments to the Major Transport Projects Facilitation Act 2009 to improve project delivery powers and other related powers. These improvements will be available not only to major transport projects declared under the Major Transport Projects Facilitation Act 2009, but also to the Suburban Rail Loop and Priority Precincts. These amendments will provide greater certainty in the interpretation, scope and delivery of a range of works and projects for the benefit of communities across the state.

By way of example, currently, when utility infrastructure needs to be relocated for a project, a project authority must compulsorily acquire an interest in the land, based on the anticipated location of the utility infrastructure, prior to construction. This can lead to a project authority acquiring more land than might ultimately be required. This can increase the State’s compensation liability and deprive a person of more of their private property rights than otherwise may be the case.

To address this issue, the Bill enables a project authority to enter, occupy, use and carry out works on any land inside the designated project area, predicated upon an intention to later acquire an interest in the land which supports constructed permanent infrastructure. Land occupiers or owners will be compensated during occupation and will be compensated in full for the land that ultimately needs to be acquired for project purposes.

Similarly, in circumstances where a project authority is seeking to extinguish an easement, it must first acquire the freehold land. This can lead to a project authority having to acquire land it does not require.

The Bill enables a project authority to immediately extinguish any easement on private or public land, by notice equivalent to a notice of acquisition. Consistent with other compulsory acquisition provisions within the MTPF Act, compensation provisions from the Land Acquisition and Compensation Act 1986 will apply to any person who has an interest in the easement that is extinguished.

The Bill also amends the road management powers within the Major Transport Projects Facilitation Act ‍2009 to improve consistency between the Major Transport Projects Facilitation Act 2009 and the Road Management Act 2004 and reduce administrative burden and delays. Roads related delivery powers under the Major Transport Projects Facilitation Act 2009 cover various road management matters from use and works powers, to powers to declare, classify, realign, close and discontinue roads. These changes will produce more effective road management powers, and as a result, more efficient delivery of projects.

The Bill also makes minor and administrative amendments that will improve the clarity and operation of the Major Transport Projects Facilitation Act 2009 and the project completion processes under the Suburban Rail Loop Act 2021.

Conclusion

This Bill represents another step in the Government’s continued commitment to develop the right infrastructure and amenities in the right places to support thriving communities across our state.

We will continue to take action to ensure Victorian’s can live where they want, close to where they work, in accessible and sustainable communities.

I commend the Bill to the house.

Cindy McLEISH (Eildon) (11:12): I move:

That the debate be adjourned.

Motion agreed to and debate adjourned.

Ordered that debate be adjourned for two weeks. Debate adjourned until Wednesday 25 ‍September.