NSW dodges productivity improvements
How ironic that the NSW government has dumped infrastructure contributions reforms proposed by the independent Productivity Commission in 2019, accepted in full by the NSW government in 2020, and supported by developers during its public exhibition in 2021. What could possibly have defeated this rarely achieved trifecta of competing interests?
It turns out that Sydney Lord Mayor Clover Moore riled up mayors from across metropolitan Sydney with the “contentious†prospect of pooling significantly lower but more broadly-based developer levies into a regional infrastructure fund[i]. The funds would then be allocated by NSW Treasury and the Department of Planning based on merit and need as demonstrated in funding requests by local and state agencies.
One can only guess that Clover and the other big city mayors were distracted by the noise from tens of billions of dollars of metro and light rail construction going on around and beneath their feet, paid for by ratepayers throughout the state. Their greatest fear? That the infrastructure levy would be charged locally but spent elsewhere.
In what appears to be role reversal, the development community must have actually read the fine print in the Productivity Commissioner’s recommendations and left the histrionics to others. If so, they would have seen that in addition to unlocking $20 billion in productivity benefits, the reforms would have improved housing affordability, made the contributions system simpler and more certain, and generated more revenue for state infrastructure by making everyone pay their fair share, even the wretchedly underserved silvertails in Double Bay.
Coincidentally, Geoff Roberts of the Greater Cities Commission reports that Sydney has failed to produce enough affordable housing. According to Roberts, a renewed focus is required on peripheral cities to overcome inbuilt inequities in current urban planning. “We don’t see the CBD model, with everybody schlepping long distances to the CBD, as the way Sydney, Newcastle, the Central Coast and Wollongong will developâ€[ii]. Geoff, please ring Clover.
领英推è
As Roberts points out, the pandemic has fundamentally changed the ways cities and regions will develop in the future. Supported by public investment high speed internet and faster rail services, regional areas can help address the critical need for more affordable housing and better access to jobs and education that Sydney is failing to deliver.
The Productivity Commission’s reforms would have gone a long way in addressing these and other shortcomings in the ways we are building our communities. These issues won’t go away. We’ve simply kicked the can down the road....again. ?
Associate Director at Urbis | Infrastructure funding and delivery specialist | Reformed Engineer
2 å¹´Seeing the response from select councils makes it easy to understand why contributions reforms have been labelled 'too hard' for the last decade. Some of the assertions made in the emails sent to subscribers by LGNSW were flat out wrong (for e.g. councils being worse off). Having said that, state government did not make it easy on themselves by presenting the RIC in the way they did. Lack of detail and lack of transparency in that one proposal could very well have bought down the entire set of reforms. If it was made clear that the RIC would also fund local infrastructure, I believe we would be in a different position.
Registered Planner | Director at Planning Partnerships | Greenfields & housing approvals specialist.
2 å¹´Politics stopping better planning outcomes. Nothing new here unfortunately. Great article thanks Joe.
Director - City Futures Research Centre at UNSW
2 年Thanks for sharing your thoughts on this important topic. Rod Sims is calling for us to more seriously consider Land and other taxes…
Director New Business and Strategic Projects
2 å¹´Crap outcome. Vested interests and small mindedness wins again
MRTPI | urban strategy | infrastructure | program governance & leadership
2 å¹´Like sands through an hourglass! Sorry to see this change of direction but we must keep the conversation going.