HAS the Select Committee on the Planning Process in the Newcastle and the broader Hunter Region exceeded its terms of reference? The interim report produced by the committee claims there was no corruption in the decision to remove the heavy rail but then addresses issues that seem to be outside its terms of reference. Because of certain revelations at the recent ICAC hearings relating to Hunter-based politicians, the committee was set up to investigate the perception that planning decisions in the Hunter may not have been made with due consideration. On September 10, 2014, David Shoebridge introduced a motion in the NSW Legislative Council to establish this committee and speaking for the motion, Hansard records Mr Shoebridge as saying: ‘‘I move this motion because it is clearly an urgent matter. It is a matter of deep urgency for this Parliament ... to look at the web of intrigue, the web of donations and the rationale behind a series of key planning decisions in the Hunter. The Premier has repeatedly said that he and his government are absolutely committed to each and every one of the planning decisions that have been made by his government and by Newcastle City Council over the past three years. I am talking about the truncation of the railway line ... I hope to see majority support for the motion so that we can begin to do our work as parliamentarians and look behind those grubby deals in Newcastle and the Hunter and shine some genuine light and some decent government on this state.’’ Put simply, the committee was formed to investigate if the Hunter-based politicians were involved in any graft and corruption regarding the planning decisions to revitalise Newcastle (which included the truncation of heavy rail east of Stewart Avenue). The committee is now aware that there was no ‘‘web of intrigue’’ or ‘‘grubby deals’’ behind these planning decisions. The committee is also now aware that ‘‘some decent government’’ occurred in making these planning decisions. In order to plan the revitalisation of Newcastle, ‘‘decent government process’’ was carried out with the preparation of the 2009 Newcastle City Centre Renewal Report by the Hunter Development Corporation. It was prepared under the governance of then-Labor minister for the Hunter, Jodi McKay and then-Labor minister for planning, Kristina Keneally. Both of these former politicians carried out their ministerial duties with utmost integrity. The major planning decisions recommended in this report include establishing: See your ad here ■A residential/tourist precinct east of Darby Street; ■A cultural/civic/university precinct in the town hall vicinity; ■A business precinct at the western end of the CBD; ■And the truncation of the rail line at Stewart Avenue. The current Coalition state government is only implementing the recommendations of this report. The committee’s interim report was released on December 18, 2014, and it does not comment on the probity and the integrity adhered to by those who prepared the Newcastle City Centre Renewal Report. However clause 6.26 of the interim report states that there is no evidence that the property developer donations mentioned at ICAC ‘‘had any impact on the decision to truncate the heavy rail’’. Because the committee has not been able to find a ‘‘web of intrigue’’ or any ‘‘grubby deals’’ behind the planning decisions, it has decided, without the permission of the Legislative Council, to extend its investigation outside the original terms of reference. It has levelled criticism at the actual planning decisions that have been made instead of commenting on whether due process was followed to determine these decisions. The committee’s interim report recommends: ■The NSW government thoroughly considers the economic, social and environmental costs and benefits of removing the rail line; ■A cost benefit analysis be done on the removal of the heavy rail; ■That the rail corridor be only used for low scale development. The committee is acting more like a ‘‘planning authority’’ rather than a watchdog whose job is to ‘‘shine some genuine light’’ and ensure ‘‘some decent government’’ occurred. As a ‘‘planning authority’’ the committee has a bit to learn. Its recommendation for only low scale development in the rail corridor is totally unnecessary as the state government has retained the ‘‘infrastructure’’ land use zoning within the rail corridor that means all major development such as residential and office buildings are prohibited. Is it too much to ask that the committee confines its report to the terms of reference that relate to the integrity surrounding the planning decisions for the renewal of Newcastle and not comment on planning decisions which it does not like? Robert Monteath is a registered surveyor, a certified practising planner, a member of the Hunter Infrastructure & Investment Board and a member of the Hunter Business Chamber’s Regional Infrastructure Committee but the opinions contained herein are his personally and not those of the two mentioned organisations
Posted on: Sat, 10 Jan 2015 22:05:24 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015