These answers
were submitted by John
McInerney on behalf of the Climate Change Coalition
More information about the Climate Change Coalition and its candidates can be found at: http://www.climatechangecoalition.com.au/
[The
answers from the candidate / party is shown to the questions below in bold]
The Redfern Waterloo Authority
1) Do you / your party support the
continuation of the Redfern Waterloo Authority (RWA)? If so what changes (if
any) would you like to see happen at the RWA? If not how should the RWA’s
present responsibilities be addressed? (In your answer you may like to address
the following related issues):
a. Why should planning control over
parts of RW be the responsibility of the RWA rather than the City of Sydney Council?
b. What benefits / risks are there for
the local community in the RWA also having responsibility for the
implementation of the Human Services (HSP) and Employment and Enterprise Plans
(EEP)?
Answer: Do not support separation of
RW from CoS.
Experience has shown this to be unsuccessful, e.g. Darling Harbour
Authority.
The Minister for Redfern Waterloo
2) Do you / your party support a separate
Minister for RW?
Answer: No
3) Since he was appointed the present
Minister has had just one public meeting restricted to public housing tenants.
The Minister initially promised four a year. Will you / your party expect a
future Minister for RW to attend regular community meetings to hear first hand
concerns about what is needed in RW?
Answer: Yes
4) RWA operates three Ministerial
Advisory Committees, whose members are half government department
representatives and half residents selected by the Minister. Do you / your
party support this being the only community input option? The Minister does not
attend Ministerial Advisory Committees – should s/he attend such meetings?
Answer: Advisory Committees are a way of fobbing off
the community.
5) Do you / your party support a
representative community reference body for the Minister and the RWA to provide
community input into the RWA?
Answer: No, should be managed through CoS
6) The RW Act provides for the Minister
for RW to deal with the Minister for Planning and with the heritage office.
Should the Minister for RW also be responsible for departments or agencies from
which s/he can receive delegated authority or on which s/he is reliant for
independent advice?
Answer: No
7) In estimates hearings the Director
General and then Minister for Aboriginal Affairs avoided questions concerning
RW citing that they were the responsibility of the Minister for RW. Should the
Minister for RW be the sole government spokesperson for RW?
Answer: No
8) What role do you / your party see
for a future Minister of Aboriginal Affairs in RW and for improving engagement between
the NSW government and the local Aboriginal communities?
Answer: A major role and responsibility.
Funding for Redfern Waterloo
9) Do you / your party support the sale
of government land in RW as a method of funding government initiatives in RW?
Answer: No, funding should be part of regional and
community development funding – not limited by availability of saleable land.
10) Do you / your party accept the
current government view that existing unmet human service needs in RW can be
addressed by reforming current human services without any additional government
funding?
Answer: No
11) Do you / your party support
increased human services funding for services in RW to meet the higher needs of
new public housing tenants?
Answer: Yes
12) The RWA has plans for government departments
to introduce early intervention strategies and other new initiatives detailed
in the RWA HSP and EEP. Do you / your party support these changes? Is it
feasible for NSW departments to operate these new early intervention strategies,
in addition to maintaining existing human services, in RW without increased funding?
Answer: Support early intervention strategies as part
of the normal role of human services agencies.
13) Many government funded human
services in RW operate from substandard premises. Should sufficient government
funds be made available to ensure suitable accommodation for all?
Answer: Yes
14) Do you / your party support
government funding to relocate the PCYC to the former Redfern School
site or to fix the substandard accommodation on the existing site?
Answer: Support relocation of PCYC.
Transparency and Community
Engagement
15) The RWA has the potentially
conflicting roles of land owner, developer, planner and consent authority. Do
you / your party support local government style transparency in the RWA so that
the community are properly notified of what decisions affecting the area are
being considered, so they can see when and by whom they are made?
Answer: Yes
16) The Upper House Inquiry into RW
called for better engagement / partnership by government with the community. Do
you / your party support a greater role for community in the various stages of
the development of RW plan rather than only being able to make written
submissions during the formal exhibition phase which is often after the plan
have been accepted by cabinet?
Answer: Yes
17) Do you / your party support the
development of a vision for RW being developed jointly by the community and the
government / RWA?
Answer: Doubt the ability of RWA to develop a
community based vision. Property
development seems to be the driving objective of the RWA.
18)
Do
you / your party support a fully integrated RW Plan where all the elements of
the Plan are publicly available prior to implementation so the community can
see that their concerns have been covered and not just those of the government?
Answer: Yes
19) Do you / your party support a
publicly released study of the education, health, aged care and other services
that will be needed for the future expanded residential and working population
of RW prior to any further sales of public land?
Answer: Yes
20) During implementation of the RW Plan
do you / your party support community involvement in the evaluation and any
necessary adjustments to the plan?
Answer: Yes
21) Are you prepared to work with the
community to build a future for RW in which the most marginalised will have a
place in the RW of tomorrow and not just those who can afford to live in a
gentrified inner city of the future?
Answer: Yes
Questions on the RWA Plans
Under the
legislation the RW Plan is made and changed by the Minister. It is proposed
that it be made up of the three RWA Plans most of which are already public.
These are the Human Services Plans, The Employment and Enterprise Plan and the
Built Environment Plans (with the redevelopment of public housing and
affordable housing outstanding). Some aspects of the Plans have raised concern
and you / you party’s comments on few specific questions based on the plans
would be appreciated.
Built Environment Plan
22) Do you / your party support the
planning controls to establish an 18 storey “commercial core” in Redfern?
Answer: No
23) Do you / your party support the sale
of parts of North Eveleigh to fund the
redevelopment of Redfern Station or should this be covered from the state
budget in the way proposed for the Town Hall Station upgrade?
Answer: Should be covered from the State budget.
24) Do you / your party support the
RWA’s proposal to fund measures to lessen the impact of main roads on the area
surrounding Redfern Station from the developer levy rather than spend this
contribution for community facilities to service the increased residential and
working populations?
Answer: The levy is an artificial barrier. Funds should be made available from the State
Budget in a prioritised form. The
removal of one-way road systems should be a high priority.
25) Should the cost of reducing the
impact of main roads on the communities they pass through be met by the RTA and
the state budget?
Answer: Yes
26) Do you / your party support the
government’s reduction of residential floor space on The Block?
Answer: No
27) Do you / your party support the 12
storey zoning gazetted over the area currently occupied by the Large Erecting
Shop or do you / your party support some continued active heritage rail and associated
tourism use of the Large Erecting Shop?
Answer: Support continued active heritage rail and
associated tourism use of the Large Erecting Shop.
28) Do you / your party support the
inclusion of an interpretive tourist link of the heritage sites listed in the
RWA’s gazetted heritage map to showcase the earlier use of the site and people
who worked at Eveleigh?
Answer: Yes
29) Do you / your party support the sale
of the former Rachel Foster site to pay for a new community health centre in
the former court house and police station?
Answer: The two actions are not necessarily
related. All income looks the same to
the State Budget.
30) RW currently has low public and open
space per capita. The increased population proposed by the RWA would further decrease
it. Should the RWA be required to provide the increased public and open space
required for the expanded population? How will you / your party stop erosion of
public amenity as population densities increase?
Answer: RWA should be required to provide increased
public open space. Public amenity must
be protected within a comprehensive town plan which includes an integrated
transport strategy.
31) Do you / your party support the
under grounding of all cabling in redevelopment areas and the provision of
infrastructure for high speed internet for new and existing residents?
Answer: Yes
32) Do you/your party, support:
a. that the developers ensure any
construction is environmentally sustainable with respect to electricity usage
for lighting/climate control, storm water re-usage, etc.?
b. the upgrade of the services
infrastructure, electricity, water supply and sewage, to cope with the increase
demand caused by the higher population densities?
c. a repair fund by developers against
building work that could potentially alter ground and ground water levels
damaging surrounding existing structures?
Answer: (a) Yes
(b) Yes (c) Yes
33) At present RW has a low level of
private car ownership and transport routes through it to the city. What
measures will you / your party support to improve the use of public transport
links for local people to the city and laterally to hospitals, shopping
centres, parks and other public amenities?
Answer: A Sydney Integrated Transport Strategy is
required to set the context for local transport planning.
Public
Housing (To be covered in BEP Stage 2)
34) Do you / your party support public
housing being housing of last resort with allocation and retention of tenancies
dependant on the highest level of need?
Answer: No, there must be a wider range of public
affordable or assisted housing using funding techniques similar to those in
place in the City of London.
35) How do you / your party propose to
handle the service needs and social impacts of public housing estates being
made up of higher needs tenants?
Answer: By committed government and private agencies
with access to appropriate State funding.
36) Do you / your party want to see the
number of public housing units maintained / increased or decreased? How will
this impact on RW?
Answer: Increases in unit numbers should be
appropriately located across the metropolitan area as part of a state-wide program
for affordable and assisted housing.
37) Do you / your party support the
current government position of reducing the proportion of the population in public
housing in RW by doubling the RW population while maintaining the same number
of public tenants. Do you support this being achieved by public private
partnership redevelopment of existing public housing?
Answer: Any increase in RW population would be
subject to a community based town plan which should also address necessary
redevelopment.
38) Do you / your party support public
housing tenants being housed in the RW area during the redevelopment of the
public housing estates?
Answer: Yes
Affordable
Housing (To be covered in BEP Stage 2)
39) Do you / your party support
affordable housing being developed in RW?
Answer: Yes
40) Do you / your party consider the
RWA’s proposed 1.25% affordable housing levy sufficient?
Answer: No
41) Please detail how your party’s
affordable housing policy would be implemented in RW and to whom affordable
housing would be available?
Answer: Similar to schemes in the City of London where fixed
proportions of affordable housing are required as part of any residential
development proposal. An affordable
housing policy should be developed by the CoS
in association with the State Government.
Human Services Plan
42) RW has a large and increasing
elderly population. Older people in RW can’t get access to many services as
they are working at capacity. Dementia and frail aged services are particularly
affected as there is no local residential facility available when independent
living is no longer an option. How do you / your party propose to meet this unmet
need?
Answer: This service should be provided through the
CoS assisted by State funding – similar to programs in Victoria.
43) How do you / your party propose to
address both the crisis and long term health needs of drug users in the area, as
well as the social disruption and crime associated with the drug trade in the
area?
Answer: Adequate funding must be provided to State
and private agencies working this field.
44) Alcohol related street and domestic
violence are major issues in the area. What steps do you / your party propose
to address this issue? Do you support the establishment of wet centres and
increased funding for culturally specific drug and alcohol detox facilities?
Answer: We support wet centres and culturally
specific dry and alcohol detox facilities.
45) People with mental health or dual
diagnosis issues are often unable to access services that cater to all their
needs. How do you / your party propose to address their problems?
Answer: Through the social outreach programs of the CoS. Note that we
support the removal of rate capping of local government.
Employment and Enterprise
Plan
46) What ongoing employment and
enterprise services would you / your party provide for the increasing needs of
public tenants in RW?
Answer: This issue should be addressed by the CoS with access to state funding and programme.
47) What policies does your party have
to assist the most marginalised in our community become job ready so they can
take advantage of the improved job market?
Answer: This issue should be dealt with by local
government with assistance from state agencies as necessary.
48) Is there anything else your would
like to add about your policies and RW which has not been covered?
Answer: We support the environmental and community
related programs currently being developed by the CoS.