Abolishing Part 3A will inevitably cause a massive development logjam due to NIMBY objections and inept Councils (with staff typically no more competent than Councillors).

I reckon the government is going to allow that to occur so it can appoint administrators in the worst cases. It might reintroduce something like Part 3A in due course too, unless it accepts the suggestion in this article

John,

Thank you for informing this important debate so concisely.

Notwithstanding the potential you see in IHAPs (Independent Hearing and Assessment Panels) do you think that the newly rejuvenated RDA (Regional Development Australia) Committees could perform a role at this 'pointy' end of the development process?

I note that from September 2009 Part 2 of their renewed ambit is: 'Informed regional planning (see < http://www.rda.gov.au/about/files/RDA_National_Roles_Responsibilities.pdf >).

Many of these Committees seem to be constituted by individuals who, taken together, could perform the role of a Panel. Or alternatively, as creatures of federal government, are these Committees consigned to a more strategic role?

I would be very interested in your view.

Bligh.

The rights, ideally, should go to the people of the electorate to vote on if they so choose.

Nobody deserves the right to impose some piece of garbage on a community that doesn't want it, doesn't benefit, and may endure reduced housing value, reduced sun-exposure (for Solar hot-water or PV electricity, as well as gardens), altered traffic, or even enjoyment of their area.
That community DOES deserve the right to intercept anything they do not want imposed upon the place they actually live in if it may alter their quality of living.

If some greedy lout doesn't like not being allowed to have their way because of a bunch of NIMBYs- too bad for him/her.

John Mant,

Thanks for your attempt to make things clear for us.

But what you say is difficult to digest by one unable to imagine that political power can exist without corruption.

Your discourse enters and exits the meanders of rules and regulations unable to establish a clean path that can satisfy the needs of the greatest part of a community on one side and the greed of some of his components on the other.

What you make clear is that this equilibrium will be difficult to reach until our society reaches that degree of maturity necessary for a true democratic practice.

Having listened to what Sir Gerard Brennan of the High Court had to say when delivering yesterdays ‘2011 George Winterton Memorial Lecture’ at the ABC Radio National, the distance from here to Democracy is long and the going hard.

In the meantime we have to swallow the most indigestible acts of criminal depredations uselessly screaming in the vast apathy that engulfs the lucky country.

But then what is the story of the people of this continent since the arrival of the white man if not a continual land grab?