Time to rewrite the NSW Planning Legislation

So even if the controls applying to my land allow a four storied building, could an ecological sustainability argument be mounted that resulted in my only getting permission for two stories?

Different States have approached this differently. South Australia, which has a parcel formatted system with desired locality statements, limits the exercise of discretion to those provided in the controls applying to the parcel in question. Depending on the amount of planning analysis of the locality, those controls may be very specific or quite general.

NSW, by contrast, encourages using the relevant controls (which usually are not place specific) and such issues as the public interest and the objects of the legislation. No wonder there is so much disputation and so many lawyers involved in the NSW system.

Some hard thinking about the nature and application of generalised statutory outcomes will be needed when it comes to designing a new planning system for NSW.

Reducing Corruption

Transparency is assisted by clarity of process, single parcel formatted controls, clear provisions about the exercise of discretions, due process hearings on disputed control setting or assessment of individual developments.

There are too few of these in the NSW system.

Taking action against political donations and lobbying and raising penalties for corruption treat symptoms but do not necessarily improve processes.

Giving the community to right to have discretionary decisions taken again by the Court (third party merit appeals) is an excellent way of reducing the potential returns from applying undue influences over decisions. There are few TP appeals in NSW. Once the decision is taken by council or the Minister, that is the end of it. It is worth an effort to influence the result.

Of course, TP appeal rights have their problems and the Court should have effective powers, and the will, to punish those who resort to appeals merely to delay. But, properly managed, TP rights would provide the most effective weapon against corrupt practices.

How to Write New Legislation

The present Opposition has talked about a longish process of review with a committee of representative interests.

This may produce the kind of camel we got with the 1979 legislation. It had some excellent features but at least five disastrous flaws, which remain despite hundreds of amendments. Problem has been that the long lasting administrators of the legislation so oversold its virtues that they have not been able to face up to fixing the flaws. Instead, they have devised convoluted ways to overcome them. The over one hundred State planning documents over time and introduction of Part 3A are examples.

A small team should do the review work but it should be required to workshop all the detail with the pressure groups and the community. Not 'what do you think of this' type of public meetings but one or, preferably, two day workshops where real work is done. It should not be possible just to stand up and have a shout or indulge in a fantasy.

So disciplined intellectual work at the centre and a maximum productive interaction between by all those with an interest are needed. These should be able to introduce a draft for discussion into Parliament within nine months.