Peter Verwer |
Wednesday, 1 June 2011 11:15 AM |
Add Comment
For more than a decade now, the Property Council has agitated for a serious plan to better manage the nation’s cities and regions.
The trifecta of population, regional and urban policies announced by the Government fills a yawning gap, but is more like a celebrity dentist capping rotten teeth than undertaking much-needed root canal work.
It’s not all policy floss.
Simon Crean’s regional policy, with its $4.3 billion spending bounty, is credible and targeted. Anthony Albanese’s urban policy is a promising framework.
However, the Government’s overarching ‘population strategy’ is little more than a policy version of the internet planking fad that’s left it face-down staring at swirling thought bubbles.
Let’s focus on the upside.
The Urban Policy seeks to join up government efforts to improve infrastructure delivery, transport, jobs and housing through better planning systems.
The Government has also provided clearer instructions to Infrastructure Australia, which can now get on with the job of developing a long-term prioritised infrastructure roll-out program.
It was way back in 1972 that a Labor minister said:
“The long-term costs of our unplanned urban growth [are] stark – not enough homes for people who need them most; high and spiralling land prices; poor sewerage services and public transport; poor educational, health and cultural facilities in new development areas; and an increasingly overloaded and polluted environment.”
That was Tom Uren, who went on to head the Department of Urban and Regional Development (DURD).
He even predicted that Australia’s population would be 23 million by the turn of the century and that we better get on and start planning for the inevitable.
Despite the myths about the infamous DURD, Uren sought to work closely with the states and local government to better plan and manage growth areas.
Uren was staring at population growth of 80 percent.
For all the hand-wringing angst over Treasury’s predicted population of 35 million by 2050, the figure represents growth of only 60 percent.
Nevertheless, for a nation that is increasingly hostage to global commodity cycles and “surpluses made in China” – in a country that will shift out of its demographic sweet spot by 2014 – planning is more crucial than ever.
Anthony Albanese’s urban policy signals a new resolve to co-ordinate policy programs.
He will tie state and territory government funding to achieving planning criteria strongly endorsed by the
Property Council.
Launching the Urban Policy at the Property Council, Albanese said the Federal Government was “putting in place all the levers at our disposal to drive, foster, encourage and, if you like, intimidate recalcitrants, if need be, to make sure they do get on board.”
The Property Council believes three crucial steps would boost the effectiveness of the Urban Policy.
First, allocate a multi-billion dollar budget to Infrastructure Australia and consider establishing a sovereign wealth fund to maintain ongoing investment.
Second, Australian governments should accept that urban policy can deliver the same dividends as National Competition Policy, which was based on agreed targets and an independent umpire.
COAG should agree to establish a Sustainable Communities Commission that will cement a carrot and stick approach to driving long-term sustainable development and micro economic reform at all levels of government.
An independent commission would ensure collective discipline and ownership across all spheres of government, based on measurable performance targets.
Third, the Government should build on the lessons of former Deputy Prime Minister Brian Howe’s Better Cities program by consolidating and boosting existing funding pots into a single, bold program for revitalising cities.
If the Government can spare $4.3 billion for regional Australia, it makes sense to spend a comparable amount on our urban communities that consistently generate 80 percent of the nation’s GDP.
Better Cities had its flaws, chief of which was the absence of clear and measurable performance targets; nevertheless, it was a serious attempt to connect up and reboot Australia’s urban circuitry.
Modern demonstration programs could revitalise urban black spots that languish as a result of poor planning and even worse co-ordination. Well-designed demonstration programs could also champion the shaping of new communities that are better connected and more self-sufficient.
As for the ‘population strategy’, it seems it has something to do with putting more jobs into regional Australia, somewhere, sometime …
$10.1 million has been allotted to develop a dashboard of social and environmental indicators.
The Property Council loves indicators, but, like the rest of the nation, we’re more interested in outcomes, which require setting performance targets and mobilising resources to meet them.
A credible population policy would set economic, social and sustainability progress targets that aim to cultivate burlier economic muscle and greater liveability. It would forge the levers to achieve these goals.
Oh well, at least the urban and regional strategies represent a de facto plan for sustained growth.
We now need politicians with the mojo of Tom Uren and Brian Howe to get on with nation building as core business.
Peter Verwer |
Wednesday, 1 June 2011 11:15 AM |
Add Comment
