The Right to Say "No " !

There seems to be no doubt that James Packer's plan to spend two billion dollars building a 275 metre tall casino, hotel and apartment tower on the Sydney waterfront at Barangaroo will be an asset to this city.  It will generate thousands of new jobs right in the city centre and the nature of the design will make it a landmark building.  It will become the lynchpin of the Barangaroo redevelopment.

Until this week there was uncertainty whether this would be allowed to proceed.  A group of people who claimed to be "neighbours " or who simply didn't like the idea banded together to form what was called the Millers Point Fund Incorporated and launched a challenge in the Land and Environment court.   This challenge was of a technical nature.       It contended that the decision be declared invalid because it was made in accordance with the state's casino licensing laws rather than the planning laws.

This challenge failed when Judge Robson rejected this line of argument and found that the licensing authority "Neither failed to exercise its powers, duties and functions , nor took into account irrelevant considerations when exercising its powers ".  The Millers Point Fund Incorporated is considering launching further appeals.

Australia's laws jealously guard the right of ordinary people to have their voices heard and engage in "David and Goliath "contests with the big end of town and usually this eventually is decided somewhere in the overlaying court systems.  If an argument is quashed in one court it is simply a matter of constructing a fresh legal argument on other grounds - and testing that in the jurisdiction of another court.

Often the real objective of launching these appeals is a game of attrition.  The objective is delay.  Every week a prime building site remains vacant and no building work is undertaken it costs the developer a mint of money.  The capital to secure the site is unproductive and work quotations always have a time clause to allow for rising costs.  Very few major buildings proceed from the planning stage to completion without running the gauntlet of at least some legal challenges.

Litigation in Australia is costly.  Both sides employ bright legal minds to ensure that their best argument is presented, but the real cost is apportioned when the decision is made.   The winning side asks for their costs to be paid by the loser - and that can run to millions of dollars.

Often, challenges are tactical battles.  Where the objection rests on political or religious grounds those launching the challenge protect their own wealth by studding the challenge committee with "men of straw ".  When the challenge fails, the imposition of "costs "goes unpaid.

Creating a great and vibrant city depends on the laws in place to speed doing business.  World money avoids regimes with a labyrinthine bureaucracy and insular court systems.   Singapore holds the pinnacle of the best and fastest city in which to establish a business and consequently it is a business success.   We need to streamline our business climate to avoid unnecessary delay and simplify the procedures to gain working approval for projects.

There is no doubt that many small businesses which have established at Barangaroo did so with the drawcard of the casino tower featuring heavily in expected crowd numbers.  Challenges introduce the uncertainty of doubt and that is anathema to business decisions.   The whole approval process needs speedy decisions within a reasonable time frame to meet world standards !