Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-ndmmz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-01T09:37:53.163Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Achieving Integrated Planning in a Federal Westminster System of Government

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 February 2016

Geoffrey Booth
Get access

Extract

Since all resources are limited, their most judicious and efficient use can only be achieved through forethought and planning. Such resource allocation decisions are predominantly made by government. When this function is spread across three levels of government each with their own departments of state and other agencies this task is made more difficult. Integrated planning involves the coordinated delivery of Commonwealth, State, Local Government and private sector investment to implement an agreed plan. The level of government in both Canada and Australia best placed to initiate, formulate and guide the implementation of such integrated plans is local government. This is despite the fact that it has no constitutional recognition and, in both revenue raising and expenditure terms, it remains very much the third tier of government.

Type
Research Article
Information
Queensland Review , Volume 7 , Issue 1 , August 2000 , pp. 53 - 68
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Works Cited

Booth, G.J. 1998. Drafting Successful Planning Schemes under Queensland's Integrated Planning Act, 1997. Brisbane: International Business Conferences.Google Scholar
Booth, G.J. 1999. Report for the Property Council of Australia on the 1999 Brisbane City Plan Draft. Brisbane: PCA.Google Scholar
Booth, G.J. 1999. Report to the Lord Mayor — Putting Customer Service into Development Assessment. Brisbane: Unpublished report commissioned by Brisbane City Council.Google Scholar
Brisbane City Council. 1999. City Plan Draft. Brisbane: BCC.Google Scholar
Dowling, P. 1997. ‘Eddie Mabo's Legacy’. Australian Planner 34, 2: 96–99.Google Scholar
Elliott, R. 1998. Capital City Vision. Brisbane: PCA.Google Scholar
Elliott, R. 1999. Capital City Policy. Brisbane: PCA.Google Scholar
Elliott, R. 1999. Capital City Profile. Brisbane: PCA.Google Scholar
Federal State Relations Committee of the Parliament of Victoria. 1998. Australian Federalism: The Role of the States. Melbourne: Government Printer.Google Scholar
Galligan, B. et al. 1989. The Constitutional Commission and the 1998 Referendums. Canberra: Centre for Research on Federal Financial Relations and the Royal Australian Institute of Public Administration (ACT Division).Google Scholar
Gibson, G. 1981. ‘Arbitrary Controls”. Royal Australian Planning Institute Journal 4, 3. Canberra: RAPI.Google Scholar
Goss, W. 1995. Restoring the Balance — the Future of the Australian Federation. Canberra: Australian National University.Google Scholar
‘Ha v New South Wales; Hammond and Associates Pty Ltd v New South Wales’. 1997. 71 ALJR 1080; 146 ALR 355.Google Scholar
Hodgins, B.A. et al. 1989. Federalism in Canada and Australia — Historical Perspectives 1920 to 1988. Peterborough, Canada: Trent University.Google Scholar
Humphreys, J. 1998. ‘Overview of the planning implications of IPA’. The New Queensland Integrated Planning Act, 1998. NSW: LAAMC Publications.Google Scholar
Kwan, J.W.C. 1998. Keynote Address to the Union of British Columbia Municipalities. Penticton: UBCA, September.Google Scholar
McInerney, J. 1998. ‘Local government planning and legislative reform’. Australian Planner 35, 3.Google Scholar
Matthews, R. et al. 1997. The Public Sector in Jeopardy — Australian Fiscal Federalism from Whitlam to Keating. Melbourne: Victoria University.Google Scholar
Middleton, M. 1995. The Growth in Influence of the Building Owners and Managers Association in the Development of Urban Policy in Australia, Brisbane: Queensland University of Technology.Google Scholar
Orchard, L. 1999. ‘Shifting visions in national urban and regional policy’. Australian Planner 36, 1.Google Scholar
Parliament of British Columbia. 1998. Bill 31, Local Government Statutes Amendment Act, 1998. Victoria: Queen's Printer.Google Scholar
Property Council of Australia. 1996. Planning for Change — Recommendations for Australia — Development Control Systems. Sydney: PCA.Google Scholar
Property Council of Australia. 1996. States of Progress – an Audit of Planning and Development Control Legislation in Australia's States and Territories. Sydney: PCA.Google Scholar
Property Council of Australia. 1998. Unfinished Business — a Statement of the Potential Cost and Other Benefits to be Derived from the Implementation of a Harmonised Framework for Development Assessment. Sydney: PCA Google Scholar
Queensland Parliament. 1936. Local Government Act. Brisbane: Government Printer, 110 (Section 30).Google Scholar
Queensland Parliament. 1997. Integrated Planning Act. Brisbane: Government Printer.Google Scholar
Redland Shire Council. 1999. Native Title Process Agreement. Brisbane: RSC.Google Scholar
Reed, A. et al. 1998. IPA Road Map – a Road Map to Navigate You Through the Highways and Byways of the Integrated Planning Act 1997. Brisbane: Property Council of Australia.Google Scholar
Roebuck, C. 1966. The World of Ancient Times. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons.Google Scholar
Tucker, J.D. et al. 1981. Local Government in Queensland, Canberra: AIUS.Google Scholar
Winston, D. 1957. Sydney's Great Experiment: The Progress of the Cumberland County Plan. Sydney: Angus and Robertson.Google Scholar