Conciliation becomes equal with planning
Is the "amalgamation emergency" responsible for more problems in the development application assessment process?
Is conciliation an acceptable method to resolve development applications?
Why is it an option?
Who is capable:-of critiquing the confusing planning - development - conciliation process?
Events at an on-site Land and Environment Court conciliation hearing have introduced conciliation as an equal with planning and development.
How this works or doesn't work is beyond my tax bracket.
A clue maybe the fact conciliation hearings are conducted behind closed doors, excluding the public, thereby allowing stakeholders including the Commissioner, to attend to the development application without public interjection.
Why is the conciliation meeting held behind closed doors?
Is this another ploy to avoid transparency?
Imagine if the public were given the same privilege as stakeholders, and their opinions given equal consideration.
Is it possible?
Why haven't ratepayers been compensated for the amalgamation emergency?
SOURCE:
Letter, 12 Feb 2024
Norm Harris, Umina