Bob Baldwin (Paterson, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Defence Science and Personnel) Share this | Hansard source

I rise today to raise concerns on behalf of the people of Paterson electorate whose rights have been eroded as part of Kevin Rudd’s reckless cash splash. I speak in particular reference to the proposed high-density affordable housing developments in Kenrose, Breckenridge and Short streets in Forster and at Flinders Street, East Maitland, which have attracted hundreds of objections. All are very similar in nature, so I will use 5A Kenrose Street to illustrate my concerns.

Let me paint the picture for you. Imagine your street is low-density residential with mostly elderly residents. Parking is sometimes a problem because of the local playgroup and church, which brings an influx of drivers on Sunday, but other than that your street is quiet and pleasant. Now imagine that you get an unsigned, undated letter in your letterbox informing you that 20 units are to be built next door. Housing NSW intends to build a 20-unit development with just four parking spots, two allocated as disabled, and barely space for ambulance access, no room for clothes lines and no yard space for the pet dog. The council has been bypassed in the decision making, and you have just three weeks to lodge an objection. This three-week period falls in December when you are already busy trying to prepare for holidays and visitors.

There are a number of indications that this is simply wrong. Firstly, residents themselves have identified a number of problems, such as: where will the 40 garbage bins go on collection day, and where will residents park when the four spaces are full? Secondly, council separately approved a development for this site, in accordance with planning controls, consisting of nine units. That is less than half the number of units that Housing NSW intends to inflict on the site. The size and density of this development are not fair on nearby residents and not fair on its potential inhabitants. It does not fit in with the environment. The lack of consultation is extremely worrying.

Obviously this is another example of devious action and mismanagement by the New South Wales state Labor government. However, the blame also rests on Kevin Rudd, who enabled the state by simply handing out taxpayers’ cash and walking away. It is like giving an eight-year-old the keys to the family car and closing your eyes when they get into the driver’s seat: it is dangerous and it is stupid. The stupidity is clear to the everyday resident, as evidenced in the dozens of letters that I have received. For example, Trevor and Julie wrote to me:

Kenrose street is a “No Through” street which means there is only one way into the subdivision and one way out. Kenrose Street is a narrow street and the plan shows that there is very limited parking for the proposed residents and visitors … With the increase flow of traffic, demand for parking and the extra pressure placed on the entry/exit point to our subdivision, we gravely fear for the safety of young children. With more cars parked in the street we feel that driving in our street could become quite difficult and dangerous. To add to the safety issues is the fact that our streets do no have footpaths and people use the roadway for walking. We are assuming that the proposed development would house at least 50 people. The units proposed appear small in size and offer extremely limited, if any, recreational area for such a large number of possible residents. The proposed residents would be living in close proximity to each other and if senior citizens are living there they may have difficulties negotiating the stairs.

This letter reflects the thoughts and minds of the hundreds of residents who recently attended a meeting with me regarding the Kenrose, Breckenridge and Short Street developments and demonstrates a number of key problems. If these problems are apparent to the untrained resident then they should be apparent to both the state and federal Labor governments, which employ trained planning professionals.

In an article in the Newcastle Herald on 22 January, the New South Wales Minister for Housing labelled these constituents as ‘narrow-minded people who struggle with the idea of sharing their neighbourhood’ and then went on to say:

The bad old days of super-blocks, poor design and high density have gone for good and everything we build from now on be they stimulus homes or state built homes, will be carefully designed to blend social housing with private housing and all well apart.

Mr Borger, you are a fool, because you believe your own media releases. You should get out from your plush office and go and talk to these people, because your statement about design and the impact on the community is hypocritical rubbish. Today I call on the Prime Minister to lend his ears to my constituents and demand that the New South Wales government do what is right for the residents affected. We must make sure, as we hand out cash to the New South Wales Labor government, that there is transparency and there is accountability for their actions and what they intend to impose upon the community. This style of development is unsuitable, unacceptable and intolerable in this community.

See this speech in context