Durd Revisited? Federal Policy Initiatives For Urban and Regional Planning 1991–94

Abstract

The recent re-entry of the Australian Government into urban and regional development has seen an outpouringof reports. Thispaperreviews these reports, and assesses their relevance to urban and regional policy. It is concluded that the reports' political impact is certainly noticeable, but their impact on the ground is limited. This is due to several factors, including the tendency to adopt pre-determined policy answers within an 'efficiency-first' framework.

The re-emergence of regional policy and planning in Western Australia

“…By the mid 1990s, however, concerns had begun to emerge about the implications of neo-liberalism (see Alexander, 1994;Badcock, 1997;HaslamMcKenzie, 2000;Tonts, 2000). Widespread evidence of severe social and economic disadvantage as a result of these policies contributed to a significant political backlash (see Pritchard & McManus, 2000;Green, 2001) and, ultimately, an adjustment in public policy.…”

“…No longer were planned interventions by governments seen as appropriate solutions to these problems. Rather, they were viewed as issues that should be determined primarily by market forces (Alexander, 1994).…”

Twenty-Five Years of Urban Policy and Research, 1982–2006

“…1,p. 5) As the above quotation suggests, the Federal government's rediscovery of urban issues spawned a good deal of research-some would argue rather more research than concrete policy outcomes (for a summary, see Alexander, 1994;Mowbray, 1994). The National Housing Strategy, the Social Justice Research Program into Locational Disadvantage, the Australian Urban and Regional Development Review and a range of more specific projects funded by various Federal government departments generated a mass of urban research output and debate.…”

Reflections on regions, the white paper and a new class politics of distribution

“…And we can observe from the statements of Keating and Howe a vague gesturing towards the social justice orientation of Whitlam and Uren, perhaps more pronounced when it comes to Deputy Prime Minister Brian Howe whose portfolio will administer these policies and whose history of personal involvement in movements for social justice is well known. While the term redistribution is rarely heard in the policy discourse of the 1990s, the White Paper clearly recognises that the effects of two decades of economic rationalism and growth have had disastrous regional impacts which cannot be ignored (Alexander 1994). 1 In this brief discussion prompted by the White Paper, I would like to consider the possible class distributional implications of the regional development policies it proposes.…”