Alannah MacTiernan ?

A short extract from Hansard, 24th May 2000 the whole episode can be read on-line.

Why quote Alannah? Just to assure those readers who think that this old cluck from Karridale is the only person who believes that community consultation is not working too great in this shire, in this state. This was 13 years ago, and still we have the same problems...... 

Ms MacTIERNAN: That is right. It is the Government's poor planning processes and the quality of its decisions that are helping community networks to be built. People are getting angry that decisions about their environment are being made without their input and in defiance of sound planning principles. People are getting out of their homes, joining together and demanding to be heard and included in the decision-making process. They want decisions made which benefit the whole community rather than those which provide windfall profits for favoured developers. They want a say in how their communities are shaped, ... For example, they want decisions that would allow urban subdivisions beyond the limits of the metropolitan area to consider the impact on the availability of recreational areas, and the cost to the State in developing urban infrastructure in those areas. In short, people want democracy done differently. We all believe that democracy is not simply marking a ballot paper every four years. The existing model of consultation is that the Government decides what it will do, it advertises its decision, and it then allows the population to write in to say what they do not like about the proposal. Generally, those submissions are ignored and the original decision is proceeded with largely untouched. There must be a better way. I have listed all the things the community groups are demanding, but the groups are not simply demanding. They have demonstrated that they are prepared to give: They bring their time, energy, commitment and a great deal of expertise to the process. I have been amazed at the talents displayed by people I meet. These citizens have displayed extraordinary tenacity to get hold of data, and question time today demonstrated how tenacious one must be to obtain data....

However, our consultative process by and large excludes them. They put in this effort and find that those efforts are filed away in large round filing cabinets at the offices of the WA Planning Commission and the Ministers for Planning, Transport and the Environment. Having set that scenario, I will now demonstrate some of the practical cases in Western Australia of ongoing conflict between the Government and the community over land use .....

Some of the conflicts I will address are Gnarabup beach and the Prevelly Wilderness Progress Association; .....

The lack of a meaningful consultation process; and the quality of planning decisions and lack of a holistic approach to land use, transport and environmental planning, which characterises many of these conflicts. .....

Mr Prince writes that the member for Moore quoted the Leader of the House as saying - . . . that as far as the South Guilderton land was concerned, "everyone had had the opportunity to have their say and the matter was now settled." Was that really true? Mr Prince states - There appears to be a complete mismatch between government at both levels, local and state, on one hand and the wider community on the other as to the meaning of the phrase "Community Consultation". The latter expect that when they are consulted, their input will be taken notice of, and, at least in some respects, acted upon. Governments, on the other hand, act as though the mere process of consultation is sufficient in itself, without there being any obligation to act on the opinions that have been expressed. The South Guilderton land question appears to have been a classic case of "allowing everyone to have their say" and then totally ignoring what they said and this explains the anger and the utter distrust of Government, at both Local and State Government levels, in the Guilderton community. Those comments could describe the feelings of the people campaigning against the Leighton Beach development before their victory. They could also accurately describe the feelings of the people in Prevelly and Margaret River about what is occurring at Gnarabup beach .....

... It was a farce. There is no community confidence that the process is genuine. The small Moore River community submitted an unprecedented total of 217 submissions about the proposed amendment to the town planning scheme. All but two opposed the amendment. However, it did not stop the amendment from being approved. The local authority, the minister and the Western Australian Planning Commission went ahead unperturbed. They instigated a consultation process but they opened the letters and chucked them in the bin. As far as they were concerned, consultation had been done.....

..... This is not all ancient history.

...... However, much to the horror of the council, the WA Planning Commission has deleted many of the most significant of the 15 conditions that were placed on that outline development plan, particularly those that related to the coastal and riverfront setbacks. It did not consult the council about those changes. Rather, it acted in what I understand is a most unorthodox way - and I gather from the council's correspondence that this is also its belief - by negotiating directly a set of different conditions with the developer with no involvement by the council. The WA Planning Commission is now making a situation that was pretty undesirable even worse, because even those minor protections that had been put in by the council with regard to river and coastal setbacks have been set to one side. .....

I have an interesting letter here which highlights the point that the Opposition has made time and time again. It is a letter to Christine Sansom from the Minister for Planning. He said –

Dear Christine . . .

Thank you for the 667 letters concerning the future use of the Scarborough Senior High School site, together with a copy of a survey conducted by the Scarborough High Open Space Action Group and a concept plan prepared by the group indicating the potential uses for public open space at the school site. . . . On 8 February 2000, the Western Australian Planning Commission made a recommendation that the Scarborough Senior High School site be transferred from 'Public Purposes (High School)' reservation to the 'Urban' Zone as part of the Metropolitan Region Scheme Amendment . . . I will consider the recommendation on the amendment and will then forward the amendment to His Excellency the Governor.

Therefore, the minister says thanks to Ms Sansom for the 667 letters, the survey and all the work her group had done to develop an alternative process, but the minister puts them in the round filing cabinet by his desk - the one brimming with submissions from her community and every other community. Community consultation in the Government's mind is not as it is in the community's mind. In the Government's mind, community consultation means that people have the right to submit letters, but it does not impose any obligation on the Government to take those submissions into account. 

==== Hansard report of proceeding continues

Footnote: The Karridale community spent time on a plan and all the councillors ignored it, the planning officers ignored it, and we were also thrown in the round filing cabinet, (maybe even shredded)