Councilor Dominic King has vividly described the State Government attempt to overhaul the planning laws as “telling us you can cook the meal and wash up but you can not eat it.”
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
He believes the NSW planning reforms give State Government the power to approve developments on the basis of economic importance giving little consideration to the opinion of local council or communities.
However, Councilor King may take some comfort that these planning amendments have hit a hurdle.
The vote to change the planning laws has been left in limbo when the Labor, Greens and Shooters and Fisheries Party combined in the upper house to force significant alterations to the proposed bill and described the changes as “eliminating the worst excesses of the bill.”
These changes included removing the controversial ‘code assessment’ provision: a proposed rule that would force councils to approve developments with no community appeal rights and also quashed the planning policy that places the benefit of large mining projects as the principle consideration.
The NSW Planning Minister Brad Hazzard, attacked the “unholy alliance” of opposing political parties and labeled their negotiations as “short-sighted and politically opportunistic.”
Local councils have been increasingly dismayed by the reversal of an election promise given by the State Government to return the planning powers to the community.
The Local Government NSW (LGNSW) recently listed planning legislation should be based on the following principles: enshrined community participation, local council given equal status to Minister and that principles of ecologically sustainable development be at the centre of the Planning Act.
Bellingen Environmental Centre (BEC) spokesperson, Carolyn Joseph, echoes much of local councils concerns and whilst agreeing that the law amendments “are a good day for communities and the environment in NSW,” she expressed disappointment that much of the bill had passed the upper house in the amended form.
“I share the belief of many people across the party lines that these bills are so flawed that should be scrapped and a new attempt based on extensive community consultation feedback should be recommended.”
The government has three months before Parliament returns in early March next year in which time it will determine a response following further consolation with the community.