Like what you've read?

On Line Opinion is the only Australian site where you get all sides of the story. We don't
charge, but we need your support. Here�s how you can help.

  • Advertise

    We have a monthly audience of 70,000 and advertising packages from $200 a month.

  • Volunteer

    We always need commissioning editors and sub-editors.

  • Contribute

    Got something to say? Submit an essay.


 The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
On Line Opinion logo ON LINE OPINION - Australia's e-journal of social and political debate

Subscribe!
Subscribe





On Line Opinion is a not-for-profit publication and relies on the generosity of its sponsors, editors and contributors. If you would like to help, contact us.
___________

Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Into the swamps of the current system, or a clear view of where to go?

By John Mant - posted Thursday, 22 December 2011


The minutes of this committee do not demonstrate an intention to fundamentally review the 'everywhere-will-look-the-same' system, which was devised by the previously captured government to make it difficult to plan for places, instead restoring standard land use zoning and facilitating development by producers of project homes, fast food outlets and other standard can-fit-anywhere urban products.

The Standard LEP, against which there is such community reaction, is the end product of a bad planning system and dysfunctional legislation. A proper review of the Planning system cannot just pass it off to an in-house committee.

Departmental Capture?

Advertisement

Unfortunately, thus far it appears the location in and staffing by the planning department, have unduly influenced the Review.

In fairness to the Reviewers, in their covering letter to the Minister they state that the Issues paper:

"Merely reflects the issues raised during the consultations - it does not seek to set the vision or details of the new simplified planning system you (theMinister) have asked us to produce."

However, the responses to the questions posed will be considered in drafting a Green Paper, to be provided by April, with a view to legislation in the Spring Session. Much effort will be put into responding to the 238 questions when there could have been a much shorter list directed at the key underlying policy issues.

With a bill expected in nine months there is very little time to drag oneself out of the swamps of complexities presented by the current Issues paper with its 238 questions and get oneself in a position to put forward fundamental arguments for change.

Sounds like fiddling at the margin is the more likely outcome from this Review.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. Page 4
  6. All


Discuss in our Forums

See what other readers are saying about this article!

Click here to read & post comments.

1 post so far.

Share this:
reddit this reddit thisbookmark with del.icio.us Del.icio.usdigg thisseed newsvineSeed NewsvineStumbleUpon StumbleUponsubmit to propellerkwoff it

About the Author

John Mant is a retired urban planner and lawyer from Sydney.

Other articles by this Author

All articles by John Mant

Creative Commons LicenseThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Photo of John Mant
Article Tools
Comment 1 comment
Print Printable version
Subscribe Subscribe
Email Email a friend
Advertisement

About Us Search Discuss Feedback Legals Privacy