Another facile piece from the usual one-dimensional tin-man IPA propaganda hacks.

Note how he accuses the players in this drama of having "subjective" ideological agendas.

Of course he and the IPA are completely ideologically and "subjectively" free arent they?

They presume to be, at least in their completely hide-bound one-dimensional tin-man certainty, completely free of any kind of ideological or "subjective" bias. Committed to some kind of eternally given, always value free, culturally neutral, and therefore transcendent "objectivity".

Never mind that in Truth & Reality they are some of the most ideologically and subjectively biased ding-bats that the world has ever seen.

And that their so called "objectivity" contains all sorts of one-dimensional subjective ideas about what is true, real and possible, and hence simultaneously dismisses all other possible points of view as power seeking delusions---subjective, ideologically biased, primitive, romantic, idealistic, and blah blah bah.

Only they see reality "real" and "true".

They are just as blinkered as the "social realist" propaganda hacks of Nazi Germany and the various communist states.

Let capitalist social-"realism" rule OK. Capitalism of course, at least in their "unbiased" eyes (rather blindness), being the most "advanced" form of culture ever seen on this planet.

Never mind that in Truth & Reality it, capitalism, has inevitably reduced ALL of human culture to rubble.

The truth of the matter that ALL systems of local government are open to corruption and always have been.

The golden rule always applies.

Those have have the gold make the rules, and ignore, break, bend, subvert, and change the rules, to suit themselves. And even change the government if necessary, via Shock Doctrine tactics if necessary.
All of course in the name of "freedom"---that is the freedom of capital, to claim its "god"-given "right" to profit, regardless of the human suffering created in the process.

I wonder how many of us are impressed with local government?
The fact is I think few, I actually wrote down that line about people who stand for election.
Far too few actually stand for other than personal power and influence, or money.
I have never known a local government I trusted and I have lived in many.
I await the destruction of my last and current one, and the down fall of its officers ,some of them or there is no justice.
This nation would be far better without local government.
Unless we have more concerns for the failures they attract than the rate payers and victims.
My party loyalty will not blind me come elections but swapping one failure for another will be of little help.

Couldn't agree more Ho Hum, except that this piece is execrable even by IPA standards.

There is a concerted campaign being waged by the development industry to strip away planning controls and development controls. Interesting to note that one of the lobby groups advocating this is Urban Taskforce http://www.urbantaskforce.com.au/ This group is headed by Aaron Gadiel, a former staffer for both Eddie Obeid and Joe Tripodi and a look on their website reveals it is hosting developer events for Frank Sartor and Michael Costa. The unholy alliance of the gutter end of the NSW Labor Right and the development industry should strike joy in the hearts of anyone who likes making money from building tat high-rise. If on the other hand you don't want this stuff built next door to you then you might have a bit of worry about.

What would happen to planning in NSW if local government were entirely sidelined? Read Elizabeth Farrelly here http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/08/02/1091432106358.html to get a bit of an idea.

Seems to me that giving all planning powers to the State Government just kicks the corruption opportunities further up the food chain. Every single important figure in the Wollongong affair had links to the ALP Right. Anyone else see a pattern emerging here?

An excellent article which defines the problem very well. Yes, Local Government severely restricts the rights of landholders, but lends itself to huge corruption by being able to selectively bend those rules without any public accountability. The restrictions and corruption are now so bad that even the developers are suffering, and representative groups like Urban Taskforce are presenting argument for change. Perhaps JohnJ might look at what the submission contains instead of focusing on who was responsible for it.

Defining the problem is the first step toward a solution.

Local Government is the closest Government to the people. For this reason it is the most complex and unfortunately misunderstood.

I do not believe ALL LAND or PROPERTY DEVELOPERS are ill-hearted and nor do I believe every Councillor with a successful business in their private life is looking to be in Council to enhance their own interest but admit, many DO!

I believe for a large some; "Local government politics tends to attract those excited by the machinations and manipulations of political life but disinterested in public policy."

This is a problem in EDUCATION and UNDERSTANDING the potential WIN|WIN value underwritten in good PUBLIC POLICIES.

Local residents as well as their local governments have poor respect of public policies saying as MOST DO "yea - yea - yea"!

From Business, Mayors and Councillors I hear (too often) ... “yes… yes…yes…but what can we do about it (and worse)... it is not our problem it is the problem of state or national government…(or even worse still)…of charity groups!”

Let us be more mindful of the “broken promises”, those Vote 1 candidates who suddenly go mute once elected by their god willing humbled constituents.

This agitates me immensely! What irritates me most is the way the modern capitalistic world continues to treat distribution and consumption as separate entities… as if money has no connection to a greater good hence the growth of disconnective-ness(s); a divided-ignored-miscalulated-obscured hidden ‘duel economy’. Growing indices of homelessness, joblessness, abuse and violence, people entrapped in a cycle of hopelessness…. as if WE really don’t care.

Second, I believe government itself has poor regard for public policy at ground levels. It is affronting. Given what public servants see at the inter-face of the streets, in the wards, in the legal systems, in aged care…. you would think that these workers would at least try to pounce on PROBLEM SOLVING solutions that might help embrace a “whole" community, so it has a better opportunity to STAND UP FOR ITSELF?

More has to be done to support the civic workers and to support the valued citizenship we confess to celebrate.

http://www.miacat.com/

Corruption is not the sole domain of local Govts.It is just easier to sack them.It is a pity we cannot sack the Iemma Govt with the same consumate ease.

I'm afraid Fester that we'll have to disagree on this. In case you hadn't noticed, local government has precisely the same public accountability as state government, ie facing regular elections. Perhaps you might explain how that works OK for state govt but not for local?

The NSW planning system is being emasculated at the behest of (and for the benefit of) the development industry. Take a look at what's happening to the NSW Heritage Office. Sartor has pre-empted an enquiry and has dismembered it http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/heritage-advisers-will-take-on-development-under-officeamalgamation/2008/02/18/1203190740575.html

I can't say I'd be particularly sorry if "the developers are suffering", but where's your proof? Is Harry Triguboff driving a Lada? My wife's Mirvac shares are doing pretty well. Seems to me that if developers were really suffering they wouldn't have the money to bribe the legislators.

As for informing myself on this issue, I put a submission in to the Federal Govt Productivity Commission enquiry into heritage. Having read a fair swag of the submissions, I feel I am well acquainted with the issues and reading PR guff from an industry ginger group is more than I can stomach at the moment. Don't complain about my argument not having substance unless you can mount one of your own (preferably backed up with some links).

it's not a pity, rj, it's a consequence of people like you being willing to submit to parliamentary rule.

"you get the government you deserve" is literally true. the crooked and incompetent buffoons who currently run nsw wales are the mirror image of the oz electorate: ignorant, flaccid, passive: walking targets for the grifters of the political parties.

the californians fired a governor they didn't like recently, and refused to pass referenda his replacement put before them. right or wrong, they at least are nobodies mugs.

ozzies, on the other hands, are anybodies mugs.

If wealth and tax records were in the public domain racketeers would find it harder to mask their ill-gotten gains.

JohnJ

"In case you hadn't noticed, local government has precisely the same public accountability as state government, ie facing regular elections. Perhaps you might explain how that works OK for state govt but not for local?"

It's the same for both. If a State Government exhibited the same endemic corruption and/or incompetence as the Wollongong Council, then I would imagine it would also face dismissal, as would a Federal Government. You have heard of "the dismissal" haven't you? Fortunately Australia's democracy contains provisions to deal with crises when elected governments fail.

"The NSW planning system is being emasculated at the behest of (and for the benefit of) the development industry."

I would suggest that it has been quite the opposite. Placing severe development restrictions on landholders greatly restricts supply. And being able to selectively and secretively bend the rules lends itself to some very profitable corruption.

The supply of housing is now at crisis point, and has been exacerbated by the federal government's high immigration policy. The need for development is so great that it is now more profitable for developers to compete in an open market with fewer development restrictions than it is to deal with corrupt councilors.

"I can't say I'd be particularly sorry if "the developers are suffering", but where's your proof?"

How uncharitable, JohnJ. I would rather judge people by who they are, not by what they are. The number of managed funds in trouble at present is one indicator that things are getting tough for the developers. But the ones I feel really sorry for are the millions of Australians facing housing stress. It would be a shame to exacerbate that stress because of a perverted hatred of property developers, wouldn't it?

"Don't complain about my argument not having substance unless you can mount one of your own (preferably backed up with some links)."

In all fairness JohnJ, I wouldn't describe your rant against developers and the NSW Labor right as constituting an argument. But I should be happy to continue the dialogue on the mechanism of the corruption and how it may be reduced.

Rant, Fester? Well, perhaps...

If the "supply of housing is now at crisis point", why are housing prices still falling in south-west Sydney? http://www.news.com.au/business/money/story/0,25479,23309209-14327,00.html I don't know that many of those who already have negative equity would thank you for depressing prices further. I will agree that well-located property is another story, but your analysis is too simplistic.

Property trusts? The problems of Centro are related to an ill-judged expansion in the US, imprudent borrowing, poor returns on investment and the collapse of US credit market, ie incompetence. Just like Multiplex at Wembley Stadium. http://www.smh.com.au/news/money/the-trouble-with-property/2008/03/03/1204402361517.html Well-run property and construction stocks have fared no worse than other stocks in the last few months.

I reject the notion that this is a problem exclusive to local government. For example Kerry Keogh, the corrupt General Manager of Strathfield Council, was given a job on the State Government's Parramatta Road Taskforce (until the Strathfield ICAC hearing) and Joe Scimone went to work for his old mate Joe Tripodi at NSW Maritime (until the Wollongong ICAC hearing). Keogh, incidentally (or perhaps not), was former chief of staff of ALP minister Ross Free. In the US they call this the "revolving door" http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Government-industry_revolving_door Join the dots Fester and tell me that there isn't a problem here...

I don't particularly hate property developers Fester, I hate corruption. Rewarding the corrupt by "reforming" (ie watering down) the current planning system doesn't look like much of a solution to me. I'm sure the ICAC will come up with some solutions, but I have little faith in the willingness of the ALP to implement them. In 2002 the ICAC found that caucusing made "a mockery of the concept of open Council and transparent decision making" http://www.icac.nsw.gov.au/files/html/pub2_64cp.htm Noticed the ALP caucusing any less since then? Me neither.

JohnJ

"If the "supply of housing is now at crisis point", why are housing prices still falling in south-west Sydney?"

That might be because housing is so unaffordable at present. But what happens when people cannot afford to buy? That's right, they rent a house or caravan, or live under a bridge or something. And what does that do to rents? Yes, they go up.

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2008/02/15/1202760599501.html

Obviously you are quite ignorant of the fact that house prices can fall under tightening supply conditions.

"I don't know that many of those who already have negative equity would thank you for depressing prices further."

If they are looking for a scapegoat I might be so priviliged, but I think it better to blame those responsible for the mess. The comment also makes me wonder whether you think that rising property values benefit the Australian economy?

"Property trusts?"

No, managed funds. They provide the capital to fund developers.

"I don't particularly hate property developers Fester, I hate corruption. Rewarding the corrupt by "reforming" (ie watering down) the current planning system doesn't look like much of a solution to me."

Would supplying drug addicts with heroin reward drug dealers? Corruption has two sides, and you only seem to see one of them here. Wouldn't the corrupt, bribe-taking councilors lose out? Wouldn't honest, hard working developers be given a fair go? Wouldn't it be good for everyone to be on a level playing field instead of a severely restricted system where councilors can bend the rules for their bribe buddies without being accountable?

I hate corruption also, and would like to see a great deal more transparency in the development process. I would also like to see an estimate of the per capita infrastructure costs for an increasing population. I suspect that this cost more than offsets the profits derived by property developers. I am dubious of the claim that high immigration is beneficial to Australia. In fact, I think it more a driver of corruption.

The Iemma government can, and should be, sacked.
An administration whose whose ministerial portfolios are in place as result of branch stacking, is by definition, corrupt.

(1) I followed your link Fester, and what did I find? That there is a rental crisis in the "city, inner-west, eastern suburbs and the lower North Shore". No mention of this issue in north-west or south-west Sydney (though to be fair, the Herald rarely reports anything except murders further west than Annandale). Seems to me this simply proves my point, ie that Sydney's property market is much more complex than your analysis would suggest. More urban release in the outer-west will have a negligible effect on prices closer in, because of the fragmentation of the market. More intensive apartment development in inner-Sydney might stabilise prices for apartments, but I suspect units represent a second-best option for a large proportion of buyers (again having little effect on prices for detached housing). Unless someone can manufacture more land close to the city, or we reduce "high immigration" (I'm inclined to agree with you on this) prices of well-located property will continue to rise.

(2) Guess we'll have to disagree on property investment. Paul Sheehan blames "casino capitalism" http://www.smh.com.au/news/opinion/mostly-losers-in-casino-capitalism/2008/03/09/1204998280861.html

(3) I'm certainly in favour of greater transparency. According to Transparency International, transparency is the idea that "those affected by administrative decisions, business transactions or charitable work to know not only the basic facts and figures but also the mechanisms and processes. It is the duty of civil servants, managers and trustees to act visibly, predictably and understandably." What Frank Sartor is doing to the planning system is exactly the opposite. Developments are "called in" willy-nilly, decisions made without consultation, documents kept secret etc etc. and local councils are merely following his lead. "Reform of the system" is generally code for reducing transparency.

(4) I believe in the merits of harm minimisation for drugs. But changing the law so drug dealers don't have to bribe cops doesn't really qualify as harm minimisation, does it?

JohnJ

Thanks for the reply.

(1)The cause of the housing crisis is simple enough (a lack of housing). The solution is also simple (increase the supply). The complexity is in the task of managing an increasing population.

Could you elaborate on your point, please. For example, would you say that rentals in Western Sydney have not risen or that vacancy rates in Western Sydney have not fallen? Interestingly I'm finding it hard to get supporting statistics. The best I can do is to note 6 rental vacancies in Macquarie Fields at an average rental of just over $300 (range $225-$385).

You might have read this Ross Gittins piece in the SMH. Immigration is at least one point of difference that I have with many property developers.

http://business.smh.com.au/an-inconvenient-truth-about-rising-immigration/20080302-1way.html?page=2

(2)Would you see such behaviour were supply and demand balanced? I doubt that you would. I believe such things to be consequential, not causative.

(3)Yes, it is amazing how much double speak there is. Freedom of Information legislation comes to mind.

(4)I would suggest that removing drug dealers from the scene would reduce harm greatly, but surely this discussion isn't relevant here?

ALP ALERT: The Cook Shire Election is over. As a women standing I came nowhere. Bad-luck-yes.

For Cook Shire-Cape York, this story is deeper. If "collaboration" is the key, it is those, whom might have had a jolly chance, had no chance. No resources at all. No cohesiveness over distance, no place to meet, no real media outlet, no way to be visible, as a region half-connected.

My concern is the bigger picture. The forces working behind the scenes were party influenced. Ms Anna Bligh must research this power structure carefully.

The Mayor (National Party) chosen is a good choice given he is a genuine person with Hope and Vision. However, what has he got to go with? I fear what is next.

With so much riding on Cape York, I see History repeating itself. I believe all the focus on Land Developments and the Indigenous people is ever more divided. On top of the "reforms", it is potentially chaos. The climate is wet, green and extremely narrow. With no civic inputs there is a small thread for this Mayor to build, to overcome the barriers, where there is little representation on anything other than individual erratic interest. The problem that was to be avoided is the one it has attracted.

As well, historical players turned-up in the count-room that suggest there was the core culture cookin'. A culture not to be under-estimated, one with interests that goes above my grasp from the ground.

Be it the National Media, the State or Federal Governments... it is that your attentive concern needs to become more grounded in Cook Shire. My concern is the residents, no matter the party. It is a changing economy and there is no room to experiment. Contact has to be made in a way that creates solid pathways not more neglect directed by the blind leading the blind. Not more administrative staff with no experience with this soil type.

I got what I wanted when Federal ALP won. If I had managed to make Council, it would have been a challenge I was ready for.

http://www.miacat.com/
.