Where is the Public Planning Vision for Tasmania?

A complete lack of vision (and incompetence in strategic planning), coupled with death by a thousand financial cuts, is eroding confidence in Tasmania’s future.

There is no discernible vision for Public Planning emanating from this government. To plan for our future we need to be thinking beyond election cycles and building a shared vision for where we are headed. Yet what we are seeing at the moment is the complete reverse of that.

We must engage with all Tasmanians in a broad public consulting exercise to collectively agree the vision for our future. Then create policies and schemes based on that feedback – in that order.

Tinkering with planning schemes can’t deliver big picture changes, unless those changes are connected to an agreed strategic approach. They’ve put the cart before the horse again.

Public Planning traverses all the infrastructure planning, maintenance and development our State needs. From water and sewerage, communications including NBN, our sports ovals, parks, network infrastructure and public buildings to how we deliver local services Public Planning is the vehicle to get us there. It must also be a vehicle for public engagement.

At the moment many Tasmanians feel they have been left out of the discussion. No one is happy that third party planning appeal rights are under threat.

Meanwhile forced mergers by stealth are an unwelcome distraction. They want to take the scalpel to local government, when we all know most councils could actually do with an injection of capital. Starving councils into submission is an appalling way to negotiate.

Is Glenorchy City Council next cab off the rank for the scalpel?

In relation to ‘super councils’ I’ve read the KPMG report and it strikes me that the business case is not strong enough. A saving of $7.6mill in salaries, when weighed against the loss of local jobs and the erosion of local services, is insufficient.

These decisions go beyond mere cost cutting exercises – we have always supported a diverse, dispersed and well funded approach to local government. It’s just the old centralise v decentralise argument which they are running in a new context.

What would things actually look like if services were centralised? Would rural and regional jobs be lost in both the public and private sector? Would rural and regional areas get forgotten in terms of infrastructure and services? What will people lose: local representation, local character identity, democracy? We need to find another way.

Instead I would be focusing on working with councils and the community to clarify the strategic vision of local government’s role. I support resource sharing and improved productivity but we want to see local government jobs stay in local communities.

We could work within the existing system to retain knowledge, talent and local jobs. Over time we could reshape existing jobs to create meaningful and valuable outcomes for the workforce and the community. Productivity can be improved and job cuts are not the only way. Our biggest asset is our people.

What Tasmanians want is a prosperous, liveable, diverse in character, sustainable future for all of Tasmania. This is a 20 year project, that ranges across many sectors, and everyone’s lives.

Spreadsheet Pete needs to put down the calculator and have a good long think about what the people actually want.

*Madeleine Ogilvie MP is Labor Member for Denison, and Shadow Minister + Communications, Enterprise & Digital Economy, + Local Government & Public Planning, + Open Government & Information Integrity, + Multicultural Affairs, + Aboriginal Affairs, Opposition Whip

www.madeleineogilvie.com