Mr Sartor has proposed “housekeeping changes” to
NSW planning laws that critics say will also empower him to approve development
projects without proper regard to their environmental effects.
Since last year controversial laws have enabled the planning
minister to seize control from councils over “state significant”
projects where bureaucratic dithering has been blamed for causing extensive
delays.
Mr Sartor has so far directly approved hundreds of
controversial developments, usurping council control.
Planners say that a bill to be debated by Parliament this
week will widen his powers.
Last night Mr Sartor angrily rejected the claims, telling
the Herald the NSW Greens and City of Sydney
Council had been “obviously telling
porkies”.
“The changes do not give the minister one extra iota of
power. This bill is about simplicity and transparency in the operation of [planning
laws]. Any suggestion otherwise is dishonest.”
If the bill is passed Mr Sartor could remove a requirement
that the Department of Planning’s director-general sit on the council’s central
planning committee, and replace him with a person of his choosing.
The committee has debated major projects in Sydney’s
CBD, including the controversial CUB development on Broadway, and Westfield’s proposal to redevelop the Pitt Street Mall
arcade at Centrepoint
Tower.
The NSW president of the Planning Institute of Australia,
Anthony Newland, criticised Mr Sartor’s proposal, saying it would be
inappropriate for him to appoint more sympathetic to his own views. The Lord
Mayor of Sydney, Clover Moore, told Parliament yesterday the change would allow
a dangerous concentration of power and patronage with the minister.
Mr Sartor said he needed the planning department’s
director-general, “Sam Haddad, on more complex issues than many of these
City of Sydney
issues. I need to appoint another regular officer to the [committee’s]
membership. Sam doesn’t have time to go to these four to five-hour meetings
every two weeks.”
Ms Moore told Parliament the bill would allow Mr Sartor
“to ignore environmental assessments prohibiting development approvals. He
just needs to “consider” them.
Environmentalists say the bill is aimed at defeating a court
challenge to Mr Sartor’s approval of a coalmine at Anvil Hill, near
Muswellbrook.
Peter Gray, a student, is seeking an order in the Land and
Environment Court that the Planning Department should consider the greenhouse
gas emissions that will result from the burning of coal when assessing the
environmental impact of the mine.
Mr Sartor said the bill had “absolutely nothing
whatsoever” to do with that court case – the amendment was written before
the case was lodged.
He said the law changes would affirm that he would rely on
the director-general’s assessments.
The Opposition spokesman on planning, Chris Hartcher, said
the proposed changes were part of a “power grab over NSW, which just goes
on unchecked”.
The Opposition and the Greens are expected to vote against
the bill.