GREENWICH SLAMS PLANS TO MOVE POWERHOUSE MUSEUM

Friday, February 27th, 2015

Alex Greenwich, The Independent Member for Sydney, has slammed plans to relocate the Powerhouse Museum from its base in Ultimo and sell off another inner city public asset.

Mr Greenwich said:

"This is clearly another sell-off of inner city assets to raise government funds at the expense of the community and city liveability, and without community discussion.
From Millers Point housing to sandstone heritage government office buildings, one-by-one the government is relocating inner city functions and services and selling assets for redevelopment without needed open space and community facilities.

The Powerhouse site is adjacent to Australia’s most densely populated suburb and the area doesn’t need more residential development. I fear the site’s open space will be seen as another “development opportunity” when it is needed now more than ever to provide space for recreation and community gatherings.

The Powerhouse must remain on its purpose-built site with improved connections to Darling Harbour and the CBD.

While I support expanding the Powerhouse collection and functions to Western Sydney, it belongs in Ultimo adjacent to the hubs of tourism, cultural institutions, Darling Harbour, higher education and Sydney’s tech start-ups, which link with its core purpose."

Mr Greenwich can be contacted on 0458042342 for further comment. 

RESOURCED: http://www.newsmaker.com.au/news/34362/greenwich-slams-plans-to-move-powerhouse-museum#.VPWUXc8cRMt 

Stoush over Barangaroo contamination bill

Nicole Hasham

February 24, 2015

The Barangaroo development site seen from King Street wharf Photo: Fiona Morris

A state government plan to clean up toxic waste at Barangaroo by digging giant holes is a veiled attempt to excavate for future buildings and save money, the company assumed responsible for the contamination says.
 

It has also emerged that the firm, Jemena, has launched legal action over decontamination at Barangaroo South. The government agency running Barangaroo has refused to guarantee taxpayers will not foot part of the hefty bill for stripping deadly chemicals such as benzene and cyanide from the harbourfront land, despite previous assurances to the contrary.
The Millers Point gasworks operated at the Barangaroo site until the 1920s, leaving behind human carcinogens and substances toxic to aquatic life that are thought to be leaching into Darling Harbour.
The government has long believed legal responsibility for much of the clean-up lies with utility firm Jemena, which acquired the company that operated the gasworks.

Advertisement

The Barangaroo Delivery Authority wants to build residential, civic and commercial buildings and public space at Central Barangaroo.
It has sought planning permission to "remediate" more than 2 hectares  of contaminated land, which would involve excavating contaminated soil, trucking it away for treatment and dumping it in landfill.
However Jemena says the plan should be refused because the work goes far beyond what is needed, and the company should not be paying to help redevelop Barangaroo.
In a letter to the planning department, Jemena said the planned work matches the shape of proposed development, and future buildings at the site require deep excavations, such as for basement car parks.
Jemena also told Fairfax Media it was in the early stages of legal action over approval to decontaminate land at Barangaroo South, saying the assessment and approval process was "inadequate".
Company spokesman Ian Israelsohn said both the Barangaroo Delivery Authority and Lend Lease, which is developing the land, are parties to the challenge.
The decontamination bill at Barangaroo has previously been put at $112 million. The authority's website states this would come at "no cost to taxpayers". Money would be recovered "from the responsible parties" and developer payments from Barangaroo South would cover any state liability. However the government lost a legal dispute over developer contributions last year and is expected to receive far less from Lend Lease than originally forecast.
A Barangaroo Delivery Authority spokesman refused to say if the public would have to pay for part of the clean-up, citing the legal action.
The authority had been trialling an on-site chemical remediation which is considered cheaper than other methods, however its plans showed the trial was unsuccessful.
The Audit Office of NSW in 2011 warned remediation costs at Barangaroo could rise depending on the method used. It said any money not recovered from the site's previous owners would be funded by the authority, which could slow down construction.
Mr Israelsohn said Jemena would make a "fair and reasonable contribution" to remediation, which should take into account the site's long, complex history, including all previous uses. He called for independent mediation to resolve the issue.
A Barangaroo Delivery Authority spokesman said only preliminary on-site remediation trials have been conducted and full-scale trials will occur this year. He said the cost of remediation and discussions with Jemena were commercial-in-confidence. Neither he nor Lend Lease would comment on the legal action. 

Millers Point Three Years On

Millers Point Three Years On

In 2012 I wrote a story about Millers Point and mentioned the threats to the community from the surrounding developments and the government’s proposed sale of public housing. Last year it was made official, the houses would be sold and since then residents have been fighting to stay in their homes and keep their community together.

It’s almost three years since I wrote about Millers Point, and High Street has a very different atmosphere. It has changed from one of peaceful community to one of struggle. Banners are hung over balconies, spray painted onto sheets in stencil letters: Millers Point Not 4 Sale; Say No to the Total Sell Off of Public Assets. The street has a stripped feeling, some of the houses already empty, others clinging on.

The building site beneath High Street is busy as the Barangaroo project continues. The construction site makes a mechanical churning, digestive kind of noise, and I imagine this is the sound of it chewing up the past. Already the shape of the land below has been altered from the straight lines of the wharves. Now the curved shoreline is a neatly curated return to a past shape, based on an 1836 map. Blocks of sandstone, each labelled with a barcode for correct placement, have been assembled at the water’s edge. A larger sandstone block than the others has been unveiled on the point, renaming it Barangaroo Point.

Millers Point is facing disappearance. Some of the houses are now empty, their windows blank and curtainless, the residents moved elsewhere. Other residents are fighting, their houses hung with handmade signs: No One wanted to be here when I came here over 30 years ago, so now should I have to go? Some Millers Point residents have lived here for three or even five generations, and all speak with sadness and anger at the loss of their community. Many are elderly and have been fighting to stay in homes where they have lived for much of their life. Most recently, a petition for Mary Vo to stay in her home for the last few years of her life has been collecting signatures.

The state government says the houses must be sold for reinvestment in the public housing system, although how exactly the money will be invested hasn’t been revealed. The houses are being gradually auctioned anyway, and continual pressure is being put on those remaining in their homes to relocate. People fear that Wooloomooloo will be next, then Glebe, until all the city’s social housing has disappeared.

Last year, just after the announcement the houses would be sold, I went to Millers Point one afternoon and spoke to the industrial heritage artist Jane Bennett who was painting the High Street vista, her easel set up near the fence. I looked through her folder of previous work, paintings of industrial landscapes that have disappeared, most of them around the harbour. It was late afternoon and a soft, sunset light was cast over the street. I watched for a little while as she painted and we talked about the Harbour Control Tower at the end of the street, where she was an artist in residence for more than a decade. Now the tower is owned by the Barangaroo corporation and will be demolished.

MP Jane BennettThe scene Jane was painting that day, the houses in the lush afternoon light, has already changed. Construction seems to bear down upon it from all sides, Barangaroo down below, roadworks. Last June I went on the tour of the development. Like all the other visitors I was given a branded water bottle, cap and tote bag as I entered and then spent time trekking around the construction zone, asking the same questions everyone else seemed to be asking: what’s going to happen to the tower, and where had the fire been? The barcoded sandstone and reptile petting zoo was meant to distract me, but it didn’t, or at least not in the right way. My eyes drifted to the streets above, and the banners hung over the railing. I didn’t want the carefully arranged development, the park where I could go down to actually touch the harbour water, if I had to look at the rows of Millers Point houses glossed up and made into exclusive residences.

Millers Point Banners 2 Walking around Millers Point in 2015, I have a grim feeling. For as long as I have known it the suburb has been a gentle place in the city, small, old houses, with miscellaneous window decorations, and always people around, leaning over their front fences, chatting. It was out of step with the cut-throat city surrounding it, and that made it precious.

On Kent Street one house has on its front wall a carefully assembled collection of laminated A4 posters of heroes and villains: Cat memes next to Tony Abbott, Johnny Rotten next to Margaret Thatcher, Clover Moore next to John Howard, amid a storm of laminated monopoly money.
The protests continue. Follow their progress at the Millers Point Community, which has resident’s stories, history and links to other resources. There are also a number of facebook groups, including Save Our Homes.

#‎savemillerspoint‬ ‪#‎wheresgabby‬ ‪#‎nosurrender‬ ‪#‎MikeScared‬
‪#‎ausunions‬ ‪#‎nswpol‬ ‪#‎housing‬ ‪#‎socialhousing‬ ‪#‎community‬ ‪#‎publichousing‬ ‪#‎humanrights‬ ‪#‎auspol‬ ‪#‎tenancytribunal‬ ‪#‎Sydney

RESOURCED: https://mirrorsydney.wordpress.com/2015/02/26/millers-point-three-years-on/

NSW state election 2015: Taxes under Labor would send NSW backwards, says Premier Mike Baird

NSW Premier Mike Baird and Family and Community Services Minister Gabrielle Upton talk to Rosemeadow resident Tom Puffett about public housing issues on Monday. Photo: Anna Warr


Nicole Hasham   State Politics Reporter                                

February 23, 2015

Raising taxes to pay for big-ticket projects such as a second harbour rail crossing would mean thousands fewer jobs and plunge NSW back into the economic doldrums, Premier Mike Baird says.

He was responding to a Galaxy poll published by News Limited on Monday which showed the government's lead over Labor was narrowing. It also showed more voters supported raising taxes to pay for $20 billion in infrastructure, rather than part-leasing the state's electricity distribution networks, known as the "poles and wires".

Advertisement

The less popular lease option is the central plank of the Baird government's re-election platform.
Mr Baird attempted to link the notion of higher taxes to the state opposition, saying such a policy was "in Labor's DNA".

"[Under Labor] taxes go up, debt goes up, but you need to understand those taxes going up … means less jobs. Thousands of less jobs," he said.

"If you want a state where debt is going up, we have thousands of less jobs and we go back to the bottom economically, well Labor is your team."

Labor last week released its infrastructure package, which would keep NSW electricity assets in public hands.

A "modest" $10 billion set of projects would be paid for in two ways: retaining for a decade a range of business taxes abolished in last year's state budget, and drawing on an "uncommitted" $4.9 billion already in the government's infrastructure fund, Restart NSW.

The opposition's treasury spokesman Michael Daley said Mr Baird was "looking really silly and rattled", and Labor's proposal to retain business taxes did not equate to raising taxes.

"Mike Baird knows not a single tax was raised, not a single cent of new debt was proposed [ by Labor] and Labor didn't have to blackmail people with asset sales," Mr Daley said.

"Instead, Labor found $10 billion of additional funding and Mike Baird is embarrassed because he said we wouldn't find any."

Mr Baird said the election on March 28 was always going to be a tough one, but voters had a "clear choice".
"We have an opposition that is promising more congestion, more crowded trains, more time in your car and on public transport getting home to your family," he said.

"This government ... has a very clear plan to take away congestion, to provide more trains and enable you to get home to your family quicker."

Mr Baird was speaking at Rosemeadow in south-western Sydney, where he announced a new hardline stance against public housing trouble makers.

If the government is re-elected, it will crack down on anti-social and illegal behaviour and evict tenants who commit serious crimes.

Mr Baird said there were "hundreds and hundreds" of problem tenants who were "taking public housing for granted. They are disrupting, they are terrorising, they are making people's lives a misery on a regular basis".

Under the policy, a person convicted of a serious offence would be evicted. A tenant will also be evicted if they breach their tenancy agreement three times in a year.

NSW Council of Social Service chief executive Tracy Howe said while public tenants deserve to feel safe, the government's policy must acknowledge that "many people who live in social housing have complex needs".

"Government has a responsibility to ensure any social housing policy aims to break cycles of disadvantage, and responds sensibly and fairly to the many and varied experiences of people living in social housing," she said.

Mr Baird said evicted tenants could access other government services.

Community Services Minister Gabrielle Upton said the government would also provide $20 million worth of grants for projects to improve public housing communal spaces, such as creating a community garden or boosting security.

Meantime, Mr Baird said the government would soon release details of how it expects to spend the proceeds of the Millers Point public housing sell-off.

Public housing advocates have criticised the government for failing to produce a business plan for the sales, which are likely to raise more than $500 million.

The government says the proceeds will be redirected back into the social housing system, but has not detailed where or how they will be spent. Mr Baird said the government would release those details "shortly" but did not guarantee it would come before the election.


RESOURCED: http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/nsw-state-election-2015/nsw-state-election-2015-taxes-under-labor-would-send-nsw-backwards-says-premier-mike-baird-20150223-13m805.html

Unions launch 'NSW Not For Sale' campaign

Saturday, February 21, 2015

By Jim McIlroy

Nurses protest against a public private partnership deal for a new hospital in Maitland, NSW, in August last year.

Unions NSW has launched a "NSW Not For Sale" campaign in the lead-up to the March 28 state elections. The campaign targets the state government's plans to privatise the power industry, as well as attacking private involvement in hospitals and TAFE.

The campaign involves TV advertisements, as well as a radio and digital blitz. It aims to mobilise union members and other volunteers for doorknocking and mass telephoning.


In addition, the NSW Nurses and Midwives Association (NMA) has announced a television ad campaign, opposing the "Americanisation" of public health, and saying that privatisation could leave people with tens of thousands of dollars in personal costs if they get sick.


NMA general secretary Brett Holmes said the ad was a response to state and federal health policy, as well as various trade deals being negotiated.


Premier Mike Baird has already been selling off public assets on a huge scale. In the past two years it sold $1 billion worth of property, ABC Online said.


"Office blocks, hospitals, schools and even an island are all up for grabs … In 2011-2012, the government sold state-owned assets worth $5 million.


"In late 2012, it established a new agency, Government Property NSW, to identify and manage the state's lucrative real estate portfolio. … Since April 2013, Government Property NSW has sold properties worth $1 billion.


"They have included seven office blocks worth $400 million, the Ausgrid building in Sydney's CBD for $151 million, and justice precinct buildings in Parramatta worth $170 million.


"It has also sold nine terrace houses in Millers Point for $22 million, and plans to sell another 293 of the historic properties," the ABC reported.


The government claimed it was selling properties that were not used to finance needed infrastructure. But Emeritus Professor of Economics at Sydney University Frank Stilwell said it was bad economic management for the government to sell increasingly valuable assets at a time when it could borrow the money so cheaply.


"As a citizen it makes me angry and as an economist it makes me very sad because there's no great economic logic at work here," Stilwell told the ABC.


"This is short-term interest being pursued against the long-term interest of the people and I think people are smart enough to see that this is not good economic strategy."


Stilwell said the government should be leasing underutilised buildings, rather than selling them.
"I think privatisation is inherently unpopular with the people, and certainly the recent election in Queensland shows that the sale of public assets was a major source of electoral damage for the incumbent government," he said.


"The problem in this case is that the sale of real estate assets tends to be done in dribs and drabs and isn't therefore quite as visible as the sale of electricity poles and wires, for example.


"So it tends to be done out of sight, but as soon as the people come to see what is happening, then I think one can expect that they will see it as bad economics, substituting short-term revenues for long-term economic management.”


Susan Price, Socialist Alliance candidate for the seat of Summer Hill in the March 28 elections, said on February 18: "This privatisation frenzy by the Baird state government is neoliberal insanity.
"They seem intent on flogging off anything that moves, belonging to the people. It is grand theft of the public purse, in the interests of big business.


"The Socialist Alliance demands a complete end to privatisation of public assets, of whatever kind. We stand for the defence and extension of the public sector, and the funding of essential new infrastructure, such as hospitals, schools and public transport facilities, by nationalising basic industries, and taxing the rich and big corporations.”


Like the article? Subscribe to Green Left now! You can also like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter.


SOURCED: https://www.greenleft.org.au/node/58335 

Voice your concerns stop the Baird Government Changing the suburb name of Millers Point to Barangaroo Point.

Voice your concerns stop the Baird Government Changing the suburb name of Millers Point to Barangaroo Point.

Support it or Object to it.

http://www.gnb.nsw.gov.au/…/current_proposals/your_comments…

Voice your concerns stop the Baird Government Changing the suburb name of Millers Point to Barangaroo Point.

Support it or Object to it.

http://www.gnb.nsw.gov.au/…/current_proposals/your_comments…

Naming proposal
Barangaroo Names
GEOGRAPHICAL NAMES ACT 1966
PURSUANT to the provisions of Section 8 of the Geographical Names Act, 1966, the Geographical Names Board hereby notifies that it proposes to assign the names:
Barangaroo Point for a point of land located in Sydney Harbour, south of Millers Point on the northern shoreline of Nawi Cove.
Barangaroo Point Reserve for a reserve in the northern extent of the suburb of Barangaroo, extending from Barangaroo Point to Millers Point.
Nawi Cove for a cove on the western shoreline of the suburb of Barangaroo, situated south of Barangaroo Point.
Watermans Cove for a cove on the western shoreline of the suburb of Barangaroo, adjacent to the intersection of Barangaroo Avenue and Watermans Quay.
Marrinawi Cove for a cove located at the northern extent of Barangaroo Point Reserve, adjacent to Moores Wharf.
Dukes Pier for a pier located within Nawi Cove.
Rowntrees Dock for a dock situated within Nawi Cove.
The position and extent for this feature is recorded and shown within the Geographical Names Register of New South Wales.
Any person wishing to make comment upon this proposal may within one (1) month of the date of this notice contact the Secretary of the Board with that comment.
In accordance with Section 9 of the Geographical Names Act 1966 all submissions lodged may be subject to a freedom of information application and may be viewed by a third party to assist the Board in considering this proposal.

Geographical Names Board
PO Box 143
BATHURST NSW 2795 Kevin Richards
Secretary

Would you like to comment on this proposal online?
‪#‎savemillerspoint‬ ‪#‎wheresgabby‬ ‪#‎nosurrender‬ ‪#‎MikeScared‬
‪#‎ausunions‬ ‪#‎nswpol‬ ‪#‎housing‬ ‪#‎socialhousing‬ ‪#‎community‬ ‪#‎publichousing‬‪#‎humanrights‬ ‪#‎auspol‬ ‪#‎tenancytribunal‬ ‪#‎Sydney‬ #ausunions #nswpol


http://www.gnb.nsw.gov.au/…/current_propos…/naming_proposal…

PURSUANT to the provisions of Section 8 of the Geographical Names Act, 1966, the Geographical Names Board hereby notifies that it proposes to assign the names:


Barangaroo Point for a point of land located in Sydney Harbour, south of Millers Point on the northern shoreline of Nawi Cove.


Barangaroo Point Reserve for a reserve in the northern extent of the suburb of Barangaroo, extending from Barangaroo Point to Millers Point.


Nawi Cove for a cove on the western shoreline of the suburb of Barangaroo, situated south of Barangaroo Point.


Watermans Cove for a cove on the western shoreline of the suburb of Barangaroo, adjacent to the intersection of Barangaroo Avenue and Watermans Quay.


Marrinawi Cove for a cove located at the northern extent of Barangaroo Point Reserve, adjacent to Moores Wharf.


Dukes Pier for a pier located within Nawi Cove.


Rowntrees Dock for a dock situated within Nawi Cove.


The position and extent for this feature is recorded and shown within the Geographical Names Register of New South Wales.


Any person wishing to make comment upon this proposal may within one (1) month of the date of this notice contact the Secretary of the Board with that comment.


In accordance with Section 9 of the Geographical Names Act 1966 all submissions lodged may be subject to a freedom of information application and may be viewed by a third party to assist the Board in considering this proposal.



Geographical Names Board
PO Box 143
BATHURST NSW 2795 Kevin Richards
Secretary

Would you like to comment on this proposal online?
‪#‎savemillerspoint‬ ‪#‎wheresgabby‬ ‪#‎nosurrender‬ ‪#‎MikeScared‬
‪#‎ausunions‬ ‪#‎nswpol‬ ‪#‎housing‬ ‪#‎socialhousing‬ ‪#‎community‬ ‪#‎publichousing‬‪#‎humanrights‬ ‪#‎auspol‬ ‪#‎tenancytribunal‬ ‪#‎Sydney‬ #ausunions #nswpol


http://www.gnb.nsw.gov.au/…/current_propos…/naming_proposal…

The capital city for big developers

Peter Mac   February 11, 2015

 

The insatiable greed of big developers is nowhere more blatantly evident now than in Sydney, and the Baird government backs them all the way. In conjunction with its support for private vehicles as the primary means of transport, and its plan for piecemeal replacement and privatisation of Sydney’s rail network, the government plans to dictate land use zoning and override objections from local councils.

Protest against WestConnex motorway in Sydney earlier this year. (Photo: John Appleya)

Last year the government announced that hundreds of homes in Haberfield, Petersham and St Peters, three historic inner Sydney suburbs, were to be compulsorily acquired and demolished to facilitate construction of the portals (entry and exit points) for the massive, highly controversial WestConnex motorway. 

The construction would require the complete demolition of beautiful streets of 19th and early 20th-century houses. It would also necessitate the partial or entire destruction of two 19th-century parks at Ashfield and Petersham (where Don Bradman made his first century in first class cricket), and an inroad into Sydney Park, created over the last 40 years at huge public expense.

 

The proposal was accompanied by a state government announcement that in other streets adjacent to the Petersham portal it would change the current zoning to allow for demolition of the old dwellings and construction of 10 to 25 storey apartment blocks. Similar proposals were made for other areas.

 

The government has also announced that under the advice of its redevelopment agency Urban Growth (predominantly staffed by former employees of development corporations) it would permit construction of an extra 60,000 apartments on Parramatta Road in the inner city, replacing the old hotels, shops and dwellings that currently line this section of the historic highway.

 

The proposed takeover of local government decision-making would mean that all heritage protection would vanish and home owners could find themselves living in an area zoned for heavy industry, or surrounded and overshadowed by apartment monoliths.

 

The tip of the iceberg

 

Following the electoral defeat of the Victorian Liberal government which had supported construction of a new motorway, the Baird government suddenly decided to alter the route and construction of the Westconnex Motorway so it would no longer pass through Petersham.

 

That relieved the immediate pressure on north Petersham as far as the motorway portal was concerned, but the government could change its mind again, and rezoning inner city suburbs to permit construction of high rise apartments is still government policy.

 

Meanwhile, Haberfield and St Peters residents still face the loss of their homes, and Ashfield Park and Sydney Park would still suffer massive encroachment.

 

But that’s just the tip of the iceberg because the government’s interlocked relationship with the developers threatens the entire city.

 

The government is evicting historic family groups from Millers Point in order to hasten the sale of their homes to the highest bidders, with no exemptions for the elderly.

 

It plans to sell off the historic Eveleigh railway workshops, which contain the last still-functioning major blacksmithing workshop in Australia.

 

Road construction and residential redevelopment is threatening thousands of beautiful heritage properties in Sydney’s North Shore suburbs and many other areas, and the government is planning vast redevelopment of the picturesque old maritime industrial areas west of the Harbour Bridge.

A nightmare vision

 

The government is arguing that half a million people will want to move to Sydney in the next 20 years, that inner city residents must make way for them and that resistance is both selfish and futile.

 

But there will always be a demand for accommodation in Sydney, and developer greed knows no time limits. Carrying the government’s argument to its logical conclusion, Sydney suburbs, particularly the inner city which has ready access to services, transport, work, recreation and of course the beautiful harbour and beaches, should be redeveloped not just for 20 years but beyond.

 

In this scenario the existing buildings would be pulled down and replaced with ever-taller structures, until, presumably, the limits of human engineering were reached, most of the inner city was covered with massive Dubai-style skyscrapers, and the city’s wonderful character was destroyed.

 

It’s an absurd, nightmare vision that should have no place in Australian town planning.

Other cities do the opposite. London, for example, places severe limits on redevelopment, takes vigorous and determined action to preserve its historic buildings, and severely restricts the number of private vehicles that can enter or even approach the inner city.

 

Its transport needs are largely met by trains and buses rather than private vehicles, and its growth is largely accommodated by redevelopment in former industrial sites and outlying low-density suburbs, and by the construction of new suburbs and towns.

 

Challenges and backdowns

Last week the federal government distanced itself from an outrageous report it had commissioned concerning sale and development of Sydney’s last undeveloped headland, between Malabar and Maroubra beaches.

 

The report said that selling the site would generate “a significant return for the government” and private investments of “up to $1 billion” during the construction phase.

 

It noted disdainfully that converting the land into a National Park would do “little to improve the economic capital of the site” and provide “little opportunity for the private sector to contribute”.

 

But Federal Minister for the Environment, Greg Hunt, frightened by plummeting opinion polls, global criticism of its environment policies, and the results of the Victorian elections, dumped the proposal. He gushed “I am passionate about ensuring this magnificent headland is retained in public hands forever”.

 

The Baird government’s intentions are also being challenged by local councils and dozens of community organisations.

 

In Newcastle the government’s hell-for-leather plan to discard the city’s rail line and open up the shoreline for development has been challenged in court by local residents.

 

Sydney City Council has announced it will oppose proposals for major extensions or alterations to the historic Miller Point houses by their new owners.

 

And Sydneysiders have watched with great interest the opposition of Melbourne residents to construction of another mammoth motorway, in a campaign which made a major contribution to defeat of the Liberal government.

 

The clear lesson from that struggle is that if you want to beat the greedy developers you have to dump the governments that serve their interests.

 

RESOURCED: http://www.cpa.org.au/guardian/2015/1672/05-the-capital-city.html

New South Wales Government sells $1 billion worth of public assets in past two years

 

Also for sale is Peat Island and adjacent foreshore land at Mooney Mooney

The New South Wales Government is selling public assets on a massive scale, offloading $1 billion worth of property in the past two years alone.

Office blocks, hospitals, schools and even an island are all up for grabs.

Some economists argue the state should hold onto its valuable real estate, but the Government insists the money would be better spent on new infrastructure and housing.

In 2011-2012, the Government sold state-owned assets worth $5 million.

In late 2012, it established a new agency, Government Property NSW, to identify and manage the state's lucrative real estate portfolio.

Agency CEO Brett Newman told the ABC the portfolio comprised 200,000 properties worth almost $130 billion.

"What we do is identify assets that don't need to be owned or are underutilised and we sell them so that the money can be reinvested in capital and improved services right across government," Mr Newman said.

Since April 2013, Government Property NSW has sold properties worth $1 billion.

They have included seven office blocks worth $400 million, the Ausgrid building in Sydney's CBD for $151 million, and justice precinct buildings in Parramatta worth $170 million.

It has also sold nine terrace houses in Millers Point for $22 million, and plans to sell another 293 of the historic properties.

The Government said the proceeds would fund new accomodation for the 58,000 people on public housing waiting lists.

The historic Bidura House and surrounding grounds at Glebe Point went under the hammer in December, selling for $33 million. Chinese developers hope to build up to 100 apartments on the site.

Also for sale is Peat Island and adjacent foreshore land at Mooney Mooney, on the Hawkesbury River, to make way for a housing estate, marina and retail hub.

Government Property NSW also wants to sell 99-year leases for two heritage-listed sandstone buildings near Circular Quay, earmarked for redevelopment as international hotels.

Part of plan to shift public servants out of CBD, says Treasurer
NSW Treasurer Andrew Constance told the ABC the big sell-off was part of a plan to shift public servants out of the CBD and reinvest the money into new housing and infrastructure projects.

"There's no point in us hanging onto the ivory towers which sit half empty when they're not being utilised in the interests of the community," Mr Constance said.

"We're not into a fire sale here, we're strategically managing our portfolio assets, based on the needs of in terms of the public sector."
Mr Constance said the Government was reinvesting the money in projects like a $300 million housing acceleration fund.

"It's designed to get the growth centres in this state moving with better local infrastructures. We're not going to tie up millions of dollars in taxpayers' money into property which could be better managed," he said.

"We have to utilise our assets more effectively in the interest of the taxpayer and as a result we've got a great strategy in terms of devolving decision making into the regions by shifting public servants out of the centre of town."

But Emeritus Professor of Economics at Sydney University, Frank Stilwell, said it was bad economic management for the Government to sell increasingly valuable assets at a time when it could borrow the money so cheaply.

"As a citizen it makes me angry and as an economist it makes me very sad because there's no great economic logic at work here," Professor Stilwell said.

"This is short-term interest being pursued against long-term interest of the people and I think people are smart enough to see that this is not a good economic strategy."

Professor Stilwell said the Government should be leasing underutilised buildings, rather than selling them.

"I think privatisation is inherently unpopular with the people and certainly the recent election in Queensland shows that the sale of public assets was a major source of electoral damage for the incumbent government," he said.

"The problem is in this case that the sale of real estate assets tends to be done in dribs and drabs and isn't therefore quite visible as the sale of electricity poles and wires for example.

"So it tends to be done rather out of sight, but as soon as the people come to see what is happening then I think one can expect that they will see it as bad economics, substituting short-run revenues for long-term economic management."

#‎savemillerspoint‬ ‪#‎wheresgabby‬ ‪#‎nosurrender‬ ‪#‎MikeScared‬
‪#‎ausunions‬ ‪#‎nswpol‬ ‪#‎housing‬ ‪#‎socialhousing‬ ‪#‎community‬ ‪#‎publichousing‬ ‪#‎humanrights‬ ‪#‎auspol‬ ‪#‎tenancytribunal‬ ‪#‎Sydney

Resourcedhttps://au.news.yahoo.com/nsw/a/26256745/new-south-wales-government-sells-1-billion-worth-of-public-assets-in-past-two-years/

MEDIA RELEASE - SECRET AUCTIONS AT MILLERS POINT RAISE COMMUNITY CONCERN

 

SOPHIE COTSIS MLC

SHADOW MINISTER FOR HOUSING

 

EDWINA LLOYD

LABOR CANDIDATE FOR SYDNEY

 

MEDIA RELEASE

Thursday, 21 August 2014

 

SECRET AUCTIONS AT MILLERS POINT RAISE COMMUNITY CONCERN

 

The NSW Liberal Government’s secret auctions of public housing properties at Millers Point strikes at the heart of community confidence that this is nothing more than a fire sale of public assets and should be stopped.

 

“The revelations that public housing at Millers Point are going to be sold in secret is just more evidence that taxpayers can have no confidence in this process and that it needs to be stopped immediately,” Shadow Minister for Housing Sophie Cotsis said.

 

“These secret auctions show the government is more concerned with a quick cash grab, rather than the best interests of taxpayers and the current tenants of these properties.

 

“The Liberals claims they want to invest the revenue from the sales in new public housing but there is no evidence of that in the budget.

 

“Everyone knows that if you are selling your house at auction, you want to attract as many bidders as possible in order to get the best price.

 

“Instead of making these auctions open for everyone, the NSW Liberal Government is holding them in secret.

 

“These secret auctions are not transparent and they do not guarantee the best return for the sale of a public asset.

 

“The Liberals’ watered down heritage requirements mean that potential speculators can landbank these properties for future development.”

 

Labor candidate for Sydney Edwina Lloyd condemned the Liberals’ handling of housing at Millers Point.

 

“Labor opposes the forced eviction of public housing tenants from Millers Point,” Labor candidate for Sydney Edwina Lloyd said.

 

“The NSW Liberal Government has already been caught tampering with reports to downplay the impact that forced evictions will have on residents’ health - and they have watered down heritage rules for purchasers of these properties.

 

“These secret auctions show that the entire process is a sham and that the Liberals are determined to sell these properties, even if it means that taxpayers do not receive the best sale price at auction.

 

“I am calling on the NSW Liberal Government to halt this sale process, talk to the tenants they are evicting and develop a real plan to deliver affordable housing in the inner-city.”

 

MEDIA CONTACT: SOPHIE COTSIS 0407 945 914

 

MEDIA RELEASE - O’FARRELL SELLS MILLERS POINT HOUSING IN BLATANT CASH GRAB

LINDA BURNEY MP

SHADOW MINISTER FOR FAMILY AND COMMUNITY SERVICES

 

SOPHIE COTSIS MLC

SHADOW MINISTER FOR HOUSING

 

LINDA SCOTT

CITY OF SYDNEY COUNCILLOR

 

MEDIA RELEASE

 

O’FARRELL SELLS MILLERS POINT HOUSING IN BLATANT CASH GRAB

 

The NSW Opposition has condemned the Liberal Government’s decision to sell off 293 properties in Millers Point – accusing it of putting the big end of town before the lives of local residents.

 

Shadow Minister for Family and Community Services Linda Burney said today that the move was a blatant cash grab done with no consultation and Minister Pru Goward could not be trusted to reinvest any proceeds in public housing.

 

This is because over the past year alone, the Liberal Government has
 

·        Overseen an explosion in the public housing waiting list to 57,000 applicants - 2000 more than last year;

 

·        Cut $42 million from the budget for public housing maintenance;

 

·        Cut $22 million from the budget for building new housing stock;

 

·        Built 1,000 fewer new properties than in the previous year;

 

·       Sought to throw residents out of their properties by proposing a cruel new “bedroom tax” straight out of the UK Conservative playbook.

 

In addition, a report by the NSW Land and Housing Corporation shows that the O’Farrell Government has cut more than 1300 public housing properties from its books.

 

“This is an appalling decision by the O’Farrell Government - throwing people out of their properties just so it can grab another city tower,” Ms Burney said.

 

“Minister Pru Goward is selling more public housing than she is building – the reality is that she is not leaving anywhere for residents to go.

 

“This is a Minister who cannot be trusted to reinvest the proceeds of this sell off into public housing – not when she’s cut maintenance, cut new building stock and overseen an explosion in the waiting list.

 

“You’d want any such claim by Pru Goward written in triplicate.

 

“It’s probably best not to believe it at all.”

 

Shadow Minister for Housing Sophie Cotsis said: “Some of the residents of Millers Point have lived in this area all their lives and have a deep connection to the community. Many of them trace their ancestry to the pioneers of Sydney – the people who built this city. Has the Liberal Party given any thought to where they will be housed and where they will go?”

  

“The message of today is very clear – if you live in inner Sydney watch out.

 

“This Government has its eyes on your property – and it’s not building anywhere else for you to move either.

 

“Public housing residents face being banished from the inner city because Barry O’Farrell doesn’t consider them good enough to live here.”

 

City of Sydney Councillor Linda Scott said: My grandmother spent her formative years in Millers Point after leaving her family's country property to make a living in the City. The stories of this area are the stories of Sydney – and Mr O'Farrell's announcement today will be devastating not only for the residents, but for all who care about Sydney's heritage.” 

 

“On Monday night, I moved an amendment calling on the City of Sydney to categorically oppose the sale of public housing in Millers Point and Dawes Point. The Lord Mayor and her supporters joined with the Liberal Councillors to defeat this motion.

 

“Only Labor is standing with this community to fight the sale of all public housing in the inner city.”

 

MEDIA CONTACT: SOPHIE COTSIS 0407 945 914

 

Gentrification, the death of Sydney and the Parisian solution

Edwina Lloyd reckons the rapid gentrification of inner Sydney means the loss of its je ne sais quoi, however, there may be a French solution…if only the State would say oui oui… 

Gentrification, rejuvenation, revitalisation, urban renewal.
Whatever you call it, it’s hard to ignore the profound changes taking place in inner-city Sydney neighbourhoods.
Balmain, for example, used to be a place where boys didn’t cry. Now Balmain boys drive BMWs, and the old Ship, Painters and Dockers Union Hall has become a fashionable “warehouse conversion”.

Gentrification by Decree

The latest Sydney suburb to face the onslaught of gentrification is Millers Point.
Unlike the process that has affected other parts of Sydney, however, the gentrification of Millers Point is not being driven by the inexorable hand of market forces, but by design.  It is gentrification by official decree.
The Baird Liberal Government has come to the conclusion that the historic working class neighborhoods of Millers Point, Dawes Point and The Rocks would be much better if they didn’t contain any actual working class residents.
Around 300 public housing tenants are thus being shipped off to less fashionable parts of Greater Sydney and beyond.
The rationale is simple: we only have so much money that we’re willing to spend on social housing and we need to get the best bang for our buck, so that means concentrating social housing in areas where land is cheaper.
So as long as inner city real estate is in demand, public housing tenants will simply have to get used to being forcibly separated from their friends, neighbours and support networks.
To the Community Services Minister Gabrielle Upton, the logic of this argument is apparently irrefutable.
What sort of city does Ms Upton want Sydney to become?  A gated community?  An extension of Vaucluse?
The Sydney I love is an eclectic, challenging, beautiful, intimate and crazy place.  Its beauty comes not only from the Harbour and the Opera House, but from the spectacular diversity of its people.
Gentrification, however, has no respect for diversity.  It judges people purely by their financial capacity to pay high rents or to buy expensive property.  Sanitised, segregated and polarised, a gentrified city loses its soul, and loses its social cohesion.

How Gentrification Works

Researchers have discovered that gentrification happens when a shabby, run-down, inner city working class area comes into contact with a coffee machine from a neighbouring suburb.*
The coffee machine lodges into the suburb’s spinal cord, and like a virus, the gentrification starts to spread – slowly, house by house, street by street.
The aroma of roasted coffee beans then starts to attract bargain hunting home renovators.
At first it’s a trickle, then suddenly an army of cashed up 30-somethings is swarming over the place like locusts, and the median house price increases exponentially.
Don’t get me wrong, I love a good episode of Grand Designs as much as the next person.
I, too, dream of buying a small abandoned weatherboard church, adding a suspended mezzanine and turning it into a funky entertainer.
Basic physics tells us that for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.  As home renovators colonise one innocent working class suburb after the next, the reaction lies in the displacement of families who can no longer afford to live in the suburb they have called home for generations.

The Parisian Solution

It doesn’t have to be this way.  Paris, for example, is fighting back against the forces of gentrification.  It is inoculating itself against homogeneity and protecting its precious social mix.
The Conseil de Paris (Council of Paris) has initiated a radical plan to buy properties in inner city areas to ensure they remain available for social housing.
(It’s worth noting that the Conseil de Paris operates under a rare hybrid model of government – it is effectively a city state, with the equivalent powers of both an Australian state government and a city council.)
Not only has money been set aside (some €850 million), but the Conseil De Paris has targeted around 8,000 apartments at 257 addresses as potential purchases.
The most controversial aspect of the plan is that Paris has given itself the power of first right of refusal over those properties should they become available for sale.
The apartments have to be sold at market price, but owners cannot sell to another purchaser if the Conseil de Paris chooses to exercise its option over the property.
This bold strategy will ensure that some subsidised social housing will remain in gentrified areas of Paris like Menilmontant, Montmartre and the Bastille.

Save Our Social Mix

Our political leaders in NSW should take note.  Paris understands that retaining a social mix in the inner city is a desirable thing.
Segregating people according to their socio-economic status not only destroys diversity, it undermines social cohesion.
The Baird Liberal Government, however, clearly doesn’t get it.  It wants to see social housing tenants moved out of the city and away from their much-vaunted and much-resented “harbour views”.
It wants to make sure the gentrified inner city becomes an exclusive enclave for the wealthy.
Meanwhile, Lord Mayor Clover Moore says the City of Sydney values diversity and social mix, but the Council needs to walk the walk – not just talk the talk.
The City of Sydney could, and should, purchase at least some of the Millers Point properties, or the Sirius building, so they can continue to be part of the city’s affordable housing assets.
The Paris model shows exactly what can be done when governments – be they regional or municipal – make social housing a priority.
All Gabrielle Upton and Clover Moore have to do is say oui oui.

*Not really, I’m making this bit up

RESOURCED: http://thebigsmoke.com.au/2015/02/03/gentrification-death-sydney-parisian-solution/
 

Australian Technology Park sale: Concerns land needed for community will end up in developers hand

James Gorman  February 04, 2015



Prime real estate: Australian Technology Park is in the process of being sold by the State Government.

THE PLANNED sell-off of the Australian Technology Park in Eveleigh is raising red flags for residents who fear a potential community asset could be lost to privatisation. 
              
Part of the State Government’s ongoing multi-million dollar sale of public property, expressions of interest were quietly called for the 13.2ha inner city precinct in December last year and closed on Friday.

REDWatch community group spokesman Geoffrey Turnbull said the sale would have serious implications for the area as development planned along the rail corridor from Central to Redfern will significantly increase population density.

“You need to make sure you have places set aside for amenities like schools, preschools, outdoor spaces and other facilities which benefit a community,” Mr Turnbull said.

“The State Government is letting go of a very valuable asset which could be used to meet those needs.

The 13.2ha site currently houses a diverse mix of tenants including commercial and government organisations.

REDWatch community group spokesman Geoffrey Turnbull says the ATP sale will rob the community of valuable future land

Once you sell that site off you lose the ability to control whether you place a new high school there or a performance space.

“It is just a trade-off to make some quick money.”

POWER PRIVATISATION PLAN PROTESTS IN COOGEE

The sell-off, being managed by Urban Growth NSW, follows a string of revenue-raising sales including the Millers Point public housing and the Glebe Bidura Children’s Court Complex.

Mr Turnbull said there were also concerns for the future of the Eveleigh Locomotive Workshop and its collection of industrial machinery, which is open to the public.



Head blacksmith Guido Gouverneur at the anvil at Wrought Artworks in the Australian Technology Park, Eveleigh

“One of the things the community want to see but don’t think the government can guarantee, is access to the collection after the sale.

“It is all well and good for the new owners to say the collection has been preserved but that’s not good enough if it can never be seen again.”

An UrbanGrowth NSW spokeswoman said existing protections for the historical buildings, items and public access would remain in place if the site were sold to a new owner.

“Any proposal to change existing access would be subject to gaining relevant development approval,” she said

RESOURCED: http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/newslocal/city-east/australian-technology-park-sale-concerns-land-needed-for-community-will-end-up-in-developers-hand/story-fngr8h22-1227207855672 

Barangaroo Point or Millers Point: new name sparks messy debate

February 3, 2015
Leesha McKenny
 

Landmark location: Barangaroo headland taking shape. Photo: Peter Rae

Months after its grand naming ceremony, Barangaroo's headland has become Sydney's most prominent moot point.

Despite being "officially named" Barangaroo Point by Premier Mike Baird in November, the name cannot be finalised until after the public has its say this month.

In the meantime, the process has sparked a boycott by the local Aboriginal land council, a dispute with Millers Point residents, and led the City of Sydney to directly contradict Mr Baird's office.





Official name not so official: The proposed names in the area.

Any further opposition during this month's compulsory public consultation period has the potential to embarrass the state government, which also went ahead with the naming without first securing a formal recommendation from the NSW Geographical Names Board.

Advertisement

A board spokeswoman said it received the submission on November 18, just 10 days before "Barangaroo Point" was unveiled on a sandstone block by Mr Baird and former Prime Minister Paul Keating.

"There have been some reports in the media that the naming proposal has been finalised. This is not the case," the spokeswoman said.

The month-long public consultation period, which will inform the board's recommendation to the Planning Minister, only begins on February 11.

But Mr Baird's office said it planned to press ahead with the name, even if this was in the face of strong public opposition.

Last year's announcement followed formal approval by the Premier and Barangaroo Delivery Authority (BDA) and "in-principle" approval from the names board, Mr Baird's spokesman said.

"It followed consultation with local Aboriginal groups and the City of Sydney," he said.
However, a council spokesman said: "The City of Sydney was not consulted over the NSW Government's naming of Barangaroo Point".

Metropolitan Local Aboriginal Land Council chief executive Nathan Moran said his organisation boycotted the naming ceremony because of the "total lack of respect" shown when organisers enlisted someone from the state's central west to perform the "Welcome to Country".

"It didn't go down real well with us," said Mr Moran, who would discuss the issue at a meeting with the BDA later this week.

"It left a very bad stain on our relations with them."

The names board has also confirmed itreceived a secondary naming proposal for "Barangaroo Point Reserve" on January 27, despite the Premier's November 28 media release: "Barangaroo Point: New Harbourside Park officially named".

Nearby resident Chris Hinkley accused the government of "jumping the gun", adding the area already had a point: Millers Point.

"If all the government literature says 'Barangaroo Point' ... it's eventually going to default to Barangaroo Point and the name Millers Point will just be … something people look up in history books," he said.

Associate Professor Michael Darcy, the director of the urban research centre at the University of Western Sydney, said Millers Point residents who opposed the new name "have an argument".
Dr Darcy said the board must consider factors like historical continuity and possible confusion when making its recommendation to Planning Minister Pru Goward, who has the final say.

The designation "point" in the new name "is the centre of contention and possible confusion," he said.
"There are alternatives. You don't have to call it Barangaroo Point," Dr Darcy said.

A BDA spokesman said neither Millers Point the suburb nor the geographical feature were being replaced.

"We have created a new harbour headland and harbour coves and in doing so have also created a new point," the spokesman said.

Names of other Barangaroo landmarks selected through a public competition – Rowntrees Dock, Barton Street, Scotch Row and Exchange Place – will also be open to public comment from February 11.
RESOURCED: http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/barangaroo-point-or-millers-point-new-name-sparks-messy-debate-20150203-12z3um.html