Local Government Electoral (Transparency and Accountability in Local Government) and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2016
Plain English Summary
Overview
This bill tightens the rules for money in Queensland local council elections and makes a range of technical fixes to planning and building laws. It lowers the donation disclosure threshold to $500, paves the way for real-time online donation reporting, and clarifies when council approval is needed alongside a private certifier's approval for building work.
Who it affects
Council candidates, donors and third parties face stricter disclosure and campaign-account rules, while home builders, private certifiers and councils get clearer rules on when a separate council approval is needed for building work.
Local council election donations
Implements recommendations from the Crime and Corruption Commission's 2015 'Transparency and accountability in local government' report. Donations must be disclosed faster and at a lower threshold, campaign accounts can only be used for campaign purposes, and unspent funds must go to another campaign, a political party, or a charity.
- Donation disclosure threshold drops to $500 for both candidates and third parties (from $200 and $1,000)
- Sets up real-time online disclosure of donations via regulation, matching the state election system being developed
- Candidates' dedicated campaign bank accounts can only be used for campaign gifts, loans and spending
- Leftover campaign funds must be kept for a future campaign, paid to the candidate's political party, or donated to charity
- Incorporated associations cannot be used to receive or hold campaign funds for a member's benefit
ECQ cost recovery from councils
Clarifies that the Electoral Commission of Queensland can recover indirect costs (such as planning, training and testing new systems) as well as direct costs from councils for running local government elections.
- Councils must pay both the direct and indirect costs of the ECQ running their elections
- Aligns local government electoral cost recovery with the state Electoral Act
Building approvals and private certifiers
Responds to the Gerhardt v Brisbane City Council court decisions by clarifying when a private certifier needs to wait for a separate council approval before signing off building work. A certifier must generally wait for any council approval that affects the form, location, use or assessment of the building work.
- Clarifies the definition of a 'building development application' depending on whether the council or a private certifier is the assessment manager
- A private certifier cannot grant a building development approval until necessary council development permits are in effect
- Introduces a new requirement that a preliminary approval from another entity (usually a council) be in effect before a certifier's development permit takes effect, where specific matters apply
Planning Act technical amendments and penalties
Brings forward several planning reforms and makes technical corrections to the Planning Act 2016, Planning and Environment Court Act 2016 and Sustainable Planning Act 2009 before they fully commence.
- Increases the maximum penalty for development offences (such as doing assessable development without a permit) from 1,665 to 4,500 penalty units
- Allows limited retrospective commencement of temporary local planning instruments with Ministerial approval
- Brings forward new Planning and Environment Court rules on when costs can be awarded (generally parties bear their own costs)
- Allows notices of appeal to the court to be served by email on the chief executive
Bill Journey
▸Committee1 Dec 2016View Hansard
Referred to Infrastructure, Planning and Natural Resources Committee
The Infrastructure, Planning and Natural Resources Committee examined the Local Government Electoral (Transparency and Accountability in Local Government) and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2016 and recommended it be passed with five additional recommendations for amendment. The bill implemented six Crime and Corruption Commission recommendations on local government transparency, addressed planning reforms, and clarified building assessment provisions. A Statement of Reservation was filed but its content was not extractable from the report.
Key findings (5)
- The bill implemented six Crime and Corruption Commission recommendations aimed at increasing transparency in the local government sector and reducing perceptions of corruption.
- Stakeholders raised concerns about donation disclosure thresholds, with debate over whether thresholds should be lowered further to align with state election requirements.
- Brisbane City Council and other local governments raised concerns about exposure to unknown and unverifiable additional costs from Electoral Commission Queensland election cost recovery changes.
- The committee recommended amendments to clarify candidate return lodgement requirements and ensure the Electoral Commission provides copies of returns to relevant local governments.
- The bill also proposed planning reforms including reverting to each party bearing its own costs in planning appeals, which the Queensland Environmental Law Association supported.
Recommendations (6)
- The committee recommends that the Local Government Electoral (Transparency and Accountability in Local Government) and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2016 be passed.
- The committee recommends that clauses 16 and 17 be amended to make it clear that candidates are required to lodge a return within the required period irrespective of whether any gifts are received during the disclosure period.
- The committee recommends that clauses 16 and 17 be amended to specify that the Electoral Commission Queensland is required to provide the chief executive officer of the relevant local government a copy of all returns for candidates who are successful in an election in that local government area.
- The committee recommends that the bill be amended to allow entirely self-funded candidates to recover any unspent money from their dedicated campaign account at the end of the disclosure period.
- The committee recommends that the bill be amended to provide an example in section 83(1)(b) of the Building Act 1975 to clarify the intended operation of the provision.
- The committee recommends that the bill be amended to create a clearer link between the provision stating that a development permit given by private certifiers does not authorise work unless a relevant preliminary approval is in place, and the provision prohibiting assessable development without a permit.
Committee report tabled
Referenced Entities
Legislation
Organisations
Roles & Offices
Sectors Affected
Classified using AGIFT/ANZSIC Australian government standards