Back

18 February 2004

Mr Peter Allen

Manager, Planning Systems

Department of Sustainability and Environment

GPO Box 2797Y

Melbourne, Vic, 3001.

Re: Victorian Nationals Submission

Proposed New Zones for Rural Victoria

Dear Mr Allen,

The Nationals fully support the need to protect Victoria’s valuable agricultural land for agricultural purposes.

However, after reading the Final Consultation Draft – November 2003 we have a number of concerns with the Proposed New Zones for Rural Victoria and their implementation.

We acknowledge that private land ownership has attached to it certain rights and responsibilities. Those rights and responsibilities are determined by community expectation on what is generally perceived to be fair and reasonable.

The Nationals believe the key to reforms of Victoria’s rural planning zones is achieving the right balance between the need to preserve good quality agricultural land and respecting the reasonable rights of landholders.

We do not believe that the simplistic approach of transferring categories of current zones to zones with new names will achieve this balance.

In particular, automatically transferring the Rural Zones to Farming Zones with the conditions described in the consultation paper is too restrictive on landholders, and local councils, and may in turn be counter productive in preserving land for productive agricultural use.

The Consultation Process

The Nationals wrote to the Minister for Planning seeking an extension of time on the submission period and are disappointed we have not received a response.

We understand the Minister has now agreed to consider submissions received beyond February 20. We seek confirmation of the actual date which is to apply.

Farmers will be the most affected by this review however, due to the lack of consultation and a short time period for submissions they have not had enough time to determine how the new zones will affect them, or to make a submission.

The new rural zones should achieve the right balance of farmers’ rights and land protection.

We believe all affected landholders should be notified directly of the proposed changes to their land.

The Planning Process

The Nationals do not support the automatic transfer from existing zones to the proposed new zones.

We also oppose councils’ ability to request the Minister for Planning to consider an amendment to schemes without exhibition where the Minister’s guidelines are met.

We believe all landholders whose zoning will be affected must be notified of proposed changes to their land use to allow them to make comment.

Of concern to The Nationals is the lack of information about the Minister’s guidelines.

We support the recommendation by the Rural Zones Review that there must be financial assistance for councils to introduce the new zones.

The Need for a Land Audit

The Nationals believe there must be a land audit or future needs analysis to determine if the land is suitable or appropriate for the new zones before being transferred.

This must be in consultation with farmers, who understand market forces.

This will ensure all premium farming land is identified and protected and land suitable to be zoned differently, such as Rural Activity or Rural Living, is also identified.

In some areas of Victoria it may be more appropriate to make a direct transition from the current Rural Zone to the proposed Rural Activity Zone.

There must be a more genuine effort to address the issues of rural zoning if we are to reach the State Government’s target of $12 billion food and fibre exports by 2010.

The Retrospective Nature of the Proposals

The Nationals vehemently oppose any use of retrospectivity in the planning of the proposed zones.

In the proposed Farming Zones for example, the prospective impact of this policy is vast.

Many people have in good faith made a sometimes substantial investment in purchasing a small parcel of apparently valuable land as a site for a future dwelling.

The implementation of this proposal as presently intended would render that land comparatively valueless.

One Dwelling per 40ha

This provision will remove many farmers existing rights. More consultation and deliberation is required before these rights are removed.

There needs to be more flexibility to allow for succession planning and dwellings for people involved in the farms activity and viability eg; managers, sharefarmers.

Intensive Agricultural Use

Different regions have different needs.

Lots less than 40ha can be viable and productive. There are many intensive farming practises such as hydroponic fruit and strawberry farms which are viable.

There needs to be more flexibility in the new rural zones to allow for these intensive practices.

Counterproductive Outcomes

Lot sizes need to be flexible to meet the community needs, particularly around urban areas.

Larger 40ha blocks could lead to land not being managed properly.

People looking for a “lifestyle block” may not be able to manage pest plant and animals sufficiently.

The removal of dwelling opportunities on titles less than 40ha will reduce the value and equity of the property.

The level of borrowing is assessed against equity and banks may well consider calling in loans where equity has been significantly reduced.

The project brief for the Reference Group made it clear that the review was to be operational.

It does not address the social, seasonal, structural or market driven issues in agriculture and focuses instead on how the rural zones deliver the State Government’s objectives as set out in the State Planning Policy Framework (SPPF).

We therefore, support the Reference Group’s recommendation of an exhaustive analysis of some of the fundamental issues confronting rural areas.

We believe analysis should be undertaken on; the impact on family farms; lack of young people staying on the farm; and the reduced number of people living in rural areas which will also impact on schools, businesses etc.

In all of this, succession planning for farm ownership – one of the most dynamic issues facing country Victoria – should be considered as a priority.

Housing lot Excisions

Many farmers want to excise off a smaller lot to live on the property and sell the remaining land to a son or daughter who will want to build a second home and work on the family farm and need the title to borrow.

Local Government should retain the right to make a determination on this crucial issue.

That decision should be appealable before VCAT.

One of the biggest issues facing agriculture is the lack of young people choosing to stay on the land and farm.

Excisions may make succession planning more attractive, as parents can excise their home, remain on the property, and sell the remaining land to their son or daughter.

There is some concern about these small excisions being bought by people who may complain about normal farming practices.

In section 32 of sale of land Act 1962 there is a “warning” to purchasers that property may be located in an area where agricultural production activity may affect their enjoyment of the property and the purchaser should undertake an investigation into other impacts on their amenity.

There needs to be stronger Right to Farm legislation prohibiting people buying in a Farming/Rural Zone from complaining about legitimate farming practices.

The 40ha Rule

The Government should emphasise the fact that Local Government does have the right to determine the minimum area to be incorporated within the proposed zones.

If it is the Government’s intention to apply the “40 ha” rule, it should say so.

If applications by Local Government to amend their planning schemes regarding this issue are inevitably going to be refused by the Government then now is the time for the Government to advise accordingly.

Conclusion

The protection of prime viable agricultural land for productive purposes is a laudable aim which The Nationals support.

The proposals now advanced by the Government are not the way to realise that aim.

Many aspects of the proposals will risk substantial damage to the economic, social and environmental fabric of country and regional Victoria.

Amendment of the proposals is crucial.

The process of their implementation must also be reviewed.

Yours truly,

Jeanette Powell MP

Member for Shepparton District

The Nationals spokesperson for Planning

FOR AND ON BEHALF OF THE NATIONALS –VICTORIA