Gazetting the Land Use Master Plan 2014—Did MND and URA Just Ignore the Law? .July 3, 2014 at 12:27am The Chief Planner for the Urban Redevelopment Authority (URA) gazetted the 2014 Master Plan on 6 June 2014. In doing so, the URA and its parent ministry, the Ministry of National Development (MND) appears to have ignored legal requirements governing amendments to the Master Plan. According to the Planning Act (Caps 232) and Rule 6 Planning (Master Plan) Rules, hearings/public inquiries must be held in response to public feedback regarding amendments to the Master Plan, provided that the feedback is not ruled frivolous During the feedback period for the Draft Master Plan in Nov-Dec 2013, several members of the public submitted written feedback over the addition of the road through Bukit Brown in the 2014 Master Plan. The roadwas not present in the previous 2008 Master Plan 2008. Some of these letter writers received what looked like a standardised reply from MND on 5 June 2014, a day before the gazetting of the 2014 Master Plan, reiterating MND’s documentation efforts in Bukit Brown and its general commitment to heritage. None of the feedback was ruled frivolous. No hearing or public inquiry took place. MND and URA may have acted inconsistently with due process of the law in not holding hearings or public inquiries before gazetting the 2014 Master Plan. As the primary policy for governing land use in Singapore, the Master Plan is subject to review and amendment every five years.Due process relating to the Master Plan specifically allows the public to give their feedback (legally termed “representations & feedback”) to MND regarding official proposals to change the use of land in the Master Plan. So long as the feedback is not ruled “frivolous”, the laws require the minister to convene hearings or public inquiries on these issues. These hearings or public inquiries should produce findings and conclusions for the minister’s consideration before a final decision is made to gazette changes to the use of land in the Master Plan By expressly allowing for feedback and requiring hearings/public inquiries to be held thereafter, due process of the law relating to Master Plan amendments enables active and meaningful public participation in the shaping of land use policy. Such a mechanism helps protect citizens and public interests by ensuring a fuller consideration of government proposals and their consequences in an official forum. By accounting for competing views, this process can lead to a final policy that has broader public acceptance. Such public support is particularly important to the Master Plan given that land use policy affects everyone in Singapore in ways ranging from housing to schooling, business, recreation, and the environment. Since MND’s 5 June response did not rule any of the public feedback as frivolous, the minister responsible is legally required to conduct hearings and public inquiries before gazetting the 2014 Master Plan. Not holding hearings or public inquiries denies members of the public their lawful right to formally raise concerns over amendments introduced by the 2014 Master Plan and MND a chance to better incorporate differing views in a way that can achieve a more socially supported and sustainable outcome. Such an exercise is especially important in an increasingly plural Singapore that contains diverse perspectives on almost any given policy issue, including land use. Due process is a critical element in the Rule of Law. Without the legally stipulated hearings and public inquiries, gazetting the 2014 Master Plan raises concerns over the legality of the policy, and whether government agencies should be implementing policies that fall short of their full legal obligations. If MND acted in a manner inconsistent with due process, this brings up questions about whether government agencies can interpret laws at will, possibly to the extent of skipping clearly mandated actions. What happens if a government agency does not follow the law is worryingly unclear. Departure from due process, or mere appearance of such, may permit room to doubt Rule of Law in Singapore, which is a key element of our system. Non-adherence to due process can be inadvertent or result from simple oversight, but remains crucial to rectify. We hope that MND will promptly take steps to clarify and, if necessary, address these issues relating to the 2014 Master Plan. * See the attached photos and the following link for examples of representations and objections made to MND during the feedback period. Names and email address are blacked out to protect the privacy of the letter writers. bukitbrown/main/?cat=93&paged=2 https://facebook/pages/all-things-Bukit-Brown/290489694353282#!/notes/sos-bukit-brown/gazetting-the-land-use-master-plan-2014did-mnd-and-ura-just-ignore-the-law/664480653634266
Posted on: Sat, 05 Jul 2014 06:39:19 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015