vcat

5 posts

Value for Money: The VCAT Blitz

Credit where it’s due. When I commented on the proposed pay-for-speed initiatives at the major cases list at VCAT last September, I argued (as did pretty much everyone) that what was really needed was extra funding across the list. VCAT is in a bad way at the moment, clearly struggling to clear its cases in a timely manner: the persistent rumour is that they lack the money to put on the Sessional Members that are needed to deal with the Planning List. And now Matthew Guy has announced what amounts to an emergency funds injection, specific to planning:

The Victorian Coalition Government has committed $1 million to tackle the backlog of planning cases before the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT).

Announcing the initiative today, Planning Minister Matthew Guy said the funding would enable approximately 800 cases to be finalised and reduce the waiting list by up to six months.

Interestingly, the press release hints at looming twelve month waiting periods, which is even worse than the eight or nine months I’ve heard of:

“Eighty per cent of cases currently on the Planning and Environment List have been waiting at least six months to be heard, and without today’s initiative were likely to wait a further six months before a hearing date was confirmed,” Mr Guy said.

Whether it’s a year or eight or nine months, the waiting times are ridiculous and make a mockery out of the various “circuit-breaking” measures that exist to allow applicants to resolve disputes or move past an intransigent council. For example, there’s no point appealing a council failure to determine an application within 60 days when VCAT are likely to be slower than the council.

Continue reading

The VCAT Fast Track: What Matthew Guy Said Before the Election

Oh no i missed the train :(

There’s not much point editorialising about the proposed introduction of a user-pays fast-track system at VCAT (as reported in The Age today). The case against is pretty much self-evident, and well enough laid out by various parties in that story; and even those who support it will see it as a necessary evil, rather than the ideal way to resource the justice system. But I thought it was worth going back to what Matthew Guy said to Planning News about VCAT when we interviewed him, before the election.

Continue reading

Transforming VCAT: Was I the Only One Who Missed This?

Transforming VCAT (click to view the document)

At some point, quietly, VCAT have slipped out their “three year strategic plan,” which appears to be the final output of the review started by former President Justice Kevin Bell. It’s not immediately clear when they did so: it’s not dated, and has simply been posted as a news update on the VCAT website. If there was wider coverage of this release, I missed it. As I write, the page for the review itself (www.transformingvcat.com.au) still hasn’t been updated with the final report; there’s also an older, lonelier page for the review as it was started by Justice Bell at www.vcatreview.com.au that also currently fails to reflect any of the final outcomes. The latter page doesn’t even refer to the re-branded discussion paper released by Justice Iain Ross.

(For those having trouble keeping up, Justice Bell released a “consultation paper” called The Role of VCAT in a Changing World in March 2009, followed by a “President’s review” called One VCAT in February 2010; and then Justice Ross released a “discussion paper” called Transforming VCAT in May 2010, followed by this undated three year strategic plan with the same name).

It’s a shame the release of the document has been so lackadaisical, because it is generally a positive document that I think Victorian planners, as regular users of the system, should welcome. I wrote two editorials for Planning News covering the review process (here and here) and it should be obvious from those that I have some issues with the way VCAT currently operate. This review won’t magically resolve those issues, and one of the biggest issues facing currently facing the Tribunal and its users – the long wait times for hearings – is a resourcing issue that can only be resolved by the new government allocating funding appropriately. Yet there are some really good things in here that if followed through should definitely improve the operation of the Tribunal.

Continue reading

Transforming One VCAT

Originally published as an editorial under a joint by-line with Tim Westcott and Gilda Di Vincenzo in Planning News 36, No. 5 (June 2010).

The Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal is currently engaged in a process of introspection. The outgoing President, Justice Kevin Bell, released his review (titled One VCAT) back in February, and in May the incoming President, Justice Iain Ross, has released his own discussion paper, Transforming VCAT. The release of two documents covering such similar material so close together is at first a little disorienting, particularly for a planning profession accustomed to a more glacial approach to review and reform. Yet it was inevitable that the change of President would result in some reframing of the previous President’s findings: the new President is to be congratulated on moving forward so quickly rather than allowing the process to bog down. The term “discussion paper” might imply that the process has returned to square one, but a comparison of Transforming VCAT with the initial March 2009 “consultation paper” The Role of VCAT in a Changing World makes it clear that the slate hasn’t been wiped clean. While Transforming VCAT is also framed as a call for submissions, it builds upon the earlier work and includes responses to various of the Bell review’s recommendations.

Continue reading

The Lawyer’s Tribunal

Originally published as an editorial under a joint by-line with Tim Westcott and Gilda Di Vincenzo in “The Lawyers’ Tribunal,” Planning News 35, no. 5 (June 2009): 4.

By the time you read this, the submission period will likely have just closed for the VCAT review.1

The Tribunal is to be commended for conducting this important review. Commenting on the Tribunal’s performance is fraught with difficulty, however. Firstly, it is hard to generalise about the performance of a Tribunal constituting many different Members; the quality of the Tribunal’s performance varies from encounter to encounter. Given the passion that often accompanies VCAT hearings, it’s also a strong test of participants’ objectivity to try to judge when they got a fair hearing and when they were dealt a legitimate stinker. Finally, one needs to filter valid grievances from the great deal of unjustified criticism that swirls around simply because the Tribunal is at the pointy end of the process and has to make hard and unpopular calls that others chicken out of.

Continue reading