“The powers of the Authority include the power to carry out development on certain land in particular circumstances and the power to direct a government agency, a State owned corporation, a local council or a person prescribed by the regulations (a relevant entity) to take particular actions in certain circumstances, with a maximum penalty of 200 penalty units for failing to comply with a direction. The Authority may work in cooperation with other government agencies and other persons and bodies if the Authority thinks it appropriate and may delegate the exercise of a function of the Authority to certain persons…..
the Minister may declare the following by notice published in the Gazette—
(a) a project for proposed development to be a declared project,
(b) a part of the State to be a reconstruction area,
(c) a part of the State to be a disaster prevention area.
The proposed Part also sets out the matters to be established before the Minister makes a declaration under the proposed Part, and provides that the notice for the declaration may specify that an Act or statutory instrument does not apply in relation to the declared project, reconstruction area or disaster prevention area.” [NSW Reconstruction Authority Bill 2022: Explanatory Note, excerpt]
Seeing the writing on the wall, the NSW Perrottet Coalition Government found a way to manoeuvre the state parliament into allowing every individual, industry or business which would otherwise have to make a case to gain consent to mine, drill, clear fell forests, pollute land or waterways and/or eradicate wildlife to the point of extinction in order to make money speculating on land, a free pass to do so. By way of the NSW Reconstruction Authority Bill 2022.
The NSW government is having another crack at setting up a natural disaster authority — but this time the body will have some far-reaching powers that have some on edge.
On Thursday, the parliament passed a bill to create the NSW Reconstruction Authority to assist communities recover from disasters as well as prepare for them.
It's designed to cut through red tape but to do so, it will have a broad remit which includes the ability to develop in national parks or on native title land.
Let's look at what it means for the state.
Why was this bill introduced?
The idea for the authority came from Lismore MP Janelle Saffin during the devastating floods her community faced earlier this year.
She said the now-dismantled Resilience NSW, which was led by Commissioner Shane Fitzsimmons, didn't have the necessary powers, and the state would be better off with a model based on the Queensland Reconstruction Authority.
The independent flood inquiry earlier this year also recommended a permanent state-wide agency dedicated to recovery and preparedness.
The Opposition's Penny Sharpe told the Upper House yesterday the "status quo" wasn't working and although this new model was "radical", Labor was willing "to give it a go".
But the Greens and Independent MLC Justin Field argued the new authority had "unfettered powers" which were unprecedented in NSW.
What powers will this authority have?
The Reconstruction Authority will be permitted to carry out development on land that's likely to be directly or indirectly affected by a natural disaster.
This includes developing land within national parks, protected marine areas or land subject to native title claims, so long as the development is necessary and appropriate.
This also includes the habitat of threatened species.
The authority will be able to do anything that is "supplementary, incidental or consequential" to these functions and the CEO will be able to take whatever steps they deem "necessary or desirable".
Communities across NSW are enduring more severe flooding as the state deals with the largest flood-related emergency response in its history — this is what it looks like.
It will however be subject to the minister for planning's control and direction, who can authorise development without assessment under the Environmental Planning Act.
The environment minister does not have any oversight over the authority but a "joint select committee" will be formed, made up of 10 MPs, who will be responsible for reviewing the authority's actions following any disaster.
A successful Greens amendment this week means the authority must now also take into account how their decisions will impact climate change.
What does all this mean?
Gundungurra elder Sharyn Halls said she's confused about where this legislation leaves Indigenous people who have land agreements, as there's no requirement for consultation.
The government's push to make sure the bill was passed before the parliamentary year finished also left Ms Halls uneasy, as she believes many people won't have even heard of it yet.
"It seemed to be too much of a rushed job," she told the ABC.
"I'm sad that no one's possibly looked into the consequences of this bill properly."
The National Parks Association (NPA) of NSW supports the idea of an authority, but says it's disappointed amendments proposed by the Greens and Mr Fields were rejected.
These included:
A ban on clearing native vegetation
A ban on developing within a national park
The ability for National Parks and Wildlife to intervene in the case of unnecessary environmental impact
Excluding property developers from the authority's advisory board
NPA president Grahame Douglas said the proposed amendments would have ensured the state's key environment assets were protected by future governments...
"An example of that is the potential abuse of a future government wanting to raise the Warragamba Dam wall in a World Heritage area using this legislation."
[my yellow highlighting]
