Community engagement is where the government connects with the public through different policies and programs and is a major focus in the world today (Hopewell & Hopewell, 2006). Public involvement is very important under the Integrated Planning Act (Hopewell & Hopewell, 2006). Hopewell & Hopewell, 2006 states that “the IPA has a period of public consultation, where the public can give their opinions or views on any development approval that might occur” (Hopewell & Hopewell, 2006, p. 21). However, community engagement under this act is limited to just information and consultation and as such does not actually involve any active participation. Therefore, it is strongly evident that while public involvement under the IPA helps community engagement,
…show more content…
These panels ensure community participation in the planning process and aims to improve the quality and efficiency of the decisions made (Jones & Wiltshire, 2011). Other aims of these development assessment panels include improving the relationships between different levels of government, improving the management of the approvals process and limiting the time it takes for a development assessment to be approved (Jones & Wiltshire, 2011). The development assessment panels hope that by doing this, development decisions will be made more quickly and will have better outcomes than the traditional democratic solutions used by local governments (Jones & Wiltshire, 2011). However, according to the NSW Local Government Association, the development assessment panels have caused local governments to be less involved in the planning process, and also challenge their ability to ensure community participation in the planning process (Jones & Wiltshire, 2011). The NSW Local Government Association also argue that development assessment panels doesn’t allow local communities to determine the future of their urban environment, doesn’t allow local communities to make decisions, consist of members who do not come from the impacted panels, and the members in the panels are from the government and not the local community (Jones & Wiltshire, 2011). Therefore, from this article, it can be gathered that while development assessment panels mostly have a positive impact on democracy and community involvement planning in SEQ, they can also have an adverse impact (Jones & Wiltshire,
These panels ensure community participation in the planning process and aims to improve the quality and efficiency of the decisions made (Jones & Wiltshire, 2011). Other aims of these development assessment panels include improving the relationships between different levels of government, improving the management of the approvals process and limiting the time it takes for a development assessment to be approved (Jones & Wiltshire, 2011). The development assessment panels hope that by doing this, development decisions will be made more quickly and will have better outcomes than the traditional democratic solutions used by local governments (Jones & Wiltshire, 2011). However, according to the NSW Local Government Association, the development assessment panels have caused local governments to be less involved in the planning process, and also challenge their ability to ensure community participation in the planning process (Jones & Wiltshire, 2011). The NSW Local Government Association also argue that development assessment panels doesn’t allow local communities to determine the future of their urban environment, doesn’t allow local communities to make decisions, consist of members who do not come from the impacted panels, and the members in the panels are from the government and not the local community (Jones & Wiltshire, 2011). Therefore, from this article, it can be gathered that while development assessment panels mostly have a positive impact on democracy and community involvement planning in SEQ, they can also have an adverse impact (Jones & Wiltshire,