"All up, it’s a pretty damming assessment of what’s been achieved in just over a decade. Of course the proponents of the current approach might warn that – without all this complexity, cost and frustration – Queensland would be subject to ‘runaway growth’ and a ‘return to the policies of sprawl.’ The answer to that, surely, is that everything prior to the late 1990s was delivered – successfully - without all this baggage. Life was affordable, the economy strong, growth was a positive and things were getting done. Queensland, and south east Queensland in particular, was regarded as a place with a strong future and a magnet for talent and capital. Now, that’s been lost."

The above sums it up pretty well. Perrhaps after all, it is a good outcome as it keeps this push for growth, growth, growth, in check.

David

Einstein also said that, "The most powerful force in the universe is compound interest" by which he was referring to the impossibility of continuous growth in a finite system. Your interesting essay illustrates how, as system sizes increase and place strains on resources (e.g. travel time and physical resources such as water etc.), continued growth becomes both more complex and more difficult. So in reply to your question, "Is the environment better served? If you believe that the only way the environment can be better served is by choking off growth under the weight of regulation and taxation, you might say yes." I guess I would have to say, unfortunately, yes.

Well done, Ross. This is a sad and accurate tale of government interference in the provision of housing. It's not confined to planning and development, of course. Governments now routinely interfere in the decisions we citizens make about our own lives. Restrictions on gambling and plain paper packaging for cigarettes are the most egregious current examples but there are now so many restrictions on the way we choose to live, it's hard to keep up with them.

It's time to revisit the contract that exists between the people and their government in Australia. Trusting the people is an essential starting point for successful government. It's only when governments trust the people that they are able to resist the siren calls of various 'go-gooder' industries to intervene in our daily behaviour.

Ross Elliott wrote 28 November 2011:

>... Albert Einstein, was noted for his powers of observation and rigorous observance of the scientific method ...

Einstein was a theoretical physicist. He left experiments and observations to others.

>... It was insanity, he once wrote, to repeat the same experiment over and over again, and to expect a different outcome. ...

I can't find where Einstein wrote that. The scientific method does in fact require the same experiment to be repeated, by a different experimenter, to confirm results.

By the way, a handwritten manuscript by Einstein is on display at the National Library of Australia: http://blog.tomw.net.au/2011/11/manuscripts-from-berlin-state-library.html

>... I wonder what Einstein would make of the last decade and a bit of experimentation in urban planning and development assessment?

Einstein had the good sense to stick to his area of expertise. As an example he refused to be President of Israel.

>... decade of ‘reform’ and ‘innovation’ in the fields of town planning ... no measureable benefit ...

What was the hypothesis being tested? What was tried? What were the expected benefits? What were the results?

>... The significant philosophical change, enforced by the regional plan, was that land for growth instantly became scarcer because planning permission would be denied in areas outside the artificially imposed land boundary ...

Placing a boundary on a city is not a new idea and would seem a reasonable approach to land planning. You need to make the city dense to make it efficient. Limiting the land available increases its value. The price signal is one way to see the land is used efficiently.

> The first South East Queensland Regional Plan 2005-2026 was born ...

Things are less complicated in Canberra: the city is much smaller and more used to planning. Last year I took part in a Canberra 2030 planning exercise. My suggestion was to triple the population within the current city limits, to make it more environmentally sustainable and financially affordable: http://blog.tomw.net.au/search/label/Canberra%202030

More recently Simon Corbell MLA, talked on "Creating a Sustainable Garden City: http://blog.tomw.net.au/2011/10/canberra-sustainable-garden-city.html

More on land planning: http://blog.tomw.net.au/search/label/land%20planning

How dare you, Ross?

Are you not aware that so many clerks are dependent on this scheme?

Are you not aware that there are no other jobs they can be good at?

Are you not aware that those clerks vote Labor in gratitude for their jobs?

Are you not aware that those clerks have mortgages and children to feed?

Are you not ashamed that just because you want your house to be approved quickly, cheaply and efficiently, you may cause those poor children to miss on their new Nintendo?

Thanks Ross

Pretty true. But whilst we have so many people who want to control the assets of others and whilst we are producing too many planners from the green indoctrinated university I can't see much changing. Pollies seem quite happy to be able to control us all by locking up our land with restrictions. It is not really about wanting the best for the country that is a big furfy. It is really about CONTROL.
We all know what is happening with the gas exploration and how they can march all over people's property and literally destroy the landscape without having to jump through any of the hurdles that tie up the landowner himself if he actually wants to do something productive.
It is one rule for them (the government) and a completely different set of rules for landowners.
Still we have to try and stop the rot somehow.