1,802
Views
4
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Articles

Post-political planning in Sydney: a turn in the wrong direction

ORCID Icon & ORCID Icon
Pages 13-22 | Received 26 May 2020, Accepted 19 Apr 2021, Published online: 16 May 2021
 

ABSTRACT

The New South Wales (NSW) Environmental Planning and Assessment Act (EPAA) was promulgated in 1979 to simplify the planning process, to pay particular attention to ecological sustainability and to improve community consultation in planning matters. In the four decades since its inception, the EPAA has been amended more than 150 times. The changes to the planning system have mostly revolved around the decision-making process, the unmistakeable struggle for control between the State and Local Government and the attempts to shift to a post-political/ managerial planning system. The delegation of substantial decision-making powers to Local Government by the EPAA on its inception forced the State Government to work collaboratively with Local Government. In practice, however, this has proven difficult for the NSW State Government. In this paper, we will draw attention to some of the decision-making reforms that have dominated the planning system debate in NSW, how they have created legitimacy questions and stronger opposition to planning decisions, and how a shift to a post-political decision-making system is being used to overcome the power and legitimacy of collaborative planning and to re-concentrate the decision-making powers in the political hierarchies. We conclude that the change to the post-political system of the past decade is a move in the wrong direction. The most recent amendment to the EPAA regarding the compulsory use of the Independent Hearing and Assessment Panels (IHAP) in all Sydney metropolitan councils, hides political influences within the decision-making process and is another means of eliminating or undermining the democratic scrutiny that comes with the exercise of political powers. These changes with time could create a risk to the integrity of the profession.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Log in via your institution

Log in to Taylor & Francis Online

PDF download + Online access

  • 48 hours access to article PDF & online version
  • Article PDF can be downloaded
  • Article PDF can be printed
USD 53.00 Add to cart

Issue Purchase

  • 30 days online access to complete issue
  • Article PDFs can be downloaded
  • Article PDFs can be printed
USD 204.00 Add to cart

* Local tax will be added as applicable

Related Research

People also read lists articles that other readers of this article have read.

Recommended articles lists articles that we recommend and is powered by our AI driven recommendation engine.

Cited by lists all citing articles based on Crossref citations.
Articles with the Crossref icon will open in a new tab.