The Editor
The Mercury
The Hobart City Council General Manager Nick Heath said in the Mercury on 25 July 2017 that the council had received a letter from the proponent for the Mount Wellington Cable Car but no application. Councillor Damon Thomas said in the same article that there was an application but it was deficient.
As I understand it, the proponent failed to provide sufficient details regarding what the cable car proposal was and where key infrastructure would be built. A land owner needs to know what they are consenting too e.g. too know it is legal.
What ever the deficiencies in the request, the HCC has never refused to grant land owner consent and is unlikely to refuse a proper request.
In its submission on the Draft Mount Wellington Cable Car Facilitation Bill 2017, the HCC questions the need for legislation to remove the requirement for the land owner consent before a development application can be submitted. It goes further, to reference legal advice it has received from Senior Council Shaun McElwaine that concludes that the government's stated reason for the legislation "has no weight".
Minister Matthew Groom will introduce legislation to parliament that he cannot justify and the HCC has legal advice is unnecessary. It seems that the sole purpose of the legislation is to score a political point for the state government, removing an obstacle to the cable car that does not exist.
Sadly, a Minister is allowed to waste the time and resources of the parliament. It is hoped that, regardless of their views on a cable car, the opposition parties and the legislative Councillors vote against the legislation solely because it is unnecessary. There are certainly more pressing pieces of legislation that the parliament should be considering.
Peter McGlone
Director
Tasmanian Conservation Trust