top of page
Search

If community participation is being standardised, is it also being strengthened?

  • Writer: Kelly Lofberg
    Kelly Lofberg
  • Apr 14
  • 3 min read

In this blog, we unpack the Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure's draft Statewide Community Participation Plan and what it means in practice. While the reforms promise greater consistency across NSW, they largely focus on notification and exhibition periods rather than meaningful engagement. We explore the opportunities, limitations and what planners, developers and councils should consider when making a submission.



NSW is on the verge of standardising community participation but not necessarily improving it. The release of the discussion paper and draft Statewide Community Participation Plan (CPP) marks a significant moment in the evolution of the planning system. For planners, developers and councils working across jurisdictions, the promise of consistent exhibition timeframes offers welcome certainty.


However, the ambition of the reform appears limited. While the draft plan provides clarity on when consultation should occur, it offers little guidance on who should be engaged, what the engagement should influence, how it should be undertaken or why meaningful participation is essential to better planning outcomes. This risks reinforcing a compliance-driven approach where proponents meet statutory requirements without improving the quality of engagement.



Why a statewide approach is being proposed


Each council currently has its own Community Participation Plan, resulting in more than 120 different consultation frameworks across NSW. This variation creates uncertainty for those working across council areas and makes it difficult to plan engagement and project timelines. The proposed statewide plan aims to provide consistent requirements, offering greater clarity and predictability for applicants, councils and communities.


How people can participate under the draft plan


The draft Statewide CPP mainly sets out when communities can participate, rather than strengthening how engagement should occur. Strategic plans would typically be exhibited for about 60 days, while planning proposals and masterplans would be exhibited for 28–42 days. At the development stage, local applications would generally be exhibited for 14 days and major projects for 28 days, with some low-impact development exempt from exhibition.



While the plan suggests engagement activities such as notifications, signage and information sessions, these are not mandatory. As a result, the framework improves consistency but does not ensure meaningful engagement, leaving the depth of participation dependent on councils and project teams.


Is this enough?


The draft Statewide CPP provides a clear and consistent baseline for exhibition periods, which is a positive step for the planning system. However, it does little to strengthen the quality of engagement.


Notification during exhibition simply tell an impacted stakeholder what the proposal is and invites feedback after all the decisions have been made.. Feedback will not shape meaningful outcomes.



Participation at the development stage remains largely exhibition-based, some low-impact developments may be exempt and broader engagement methods are encouraged but not required. Consequently, meaningful community involvement will continue to rely on the willingness of councils and proponents to go beyond the minimum requirements.



What the draft Statewide CPP really means for the sector?


The draft Statewide CPP standardises notification and exhibition periods, not consultation. It sets timeframes for informing the community and receiving written submissions, typically after key decisions have already been made.


  • Developers: Gain certainty and a clear compliance pathway, which may encourage a minimum compliance approach focused on notification and exhibition.

  • Councils: Benefit from consistency but retain responsibility for any meaningful engagement, which remains optional rather than required.

  • Engagement professionals: As proactive engagement is not required, proponents can meet their obligations without involving specialist practitioners. As a result, the role of engagement professionals remains driven by project risk and organisational commitment rather than statutory expectation.


Have your say on the future of community participation


The draft Statewide CPP is not yet finalised and represents a significant shift in how community consultation will be delivered across NSW. While it promises greater consistency in when engagement occurs, it raises important questions about how and why communities are involved in planning decisions.


This consultation period is a rare opportunity to influence a framework that will shape planning practice for


years to come. Whether you are a council officer, planner, developer or engagement professional, your perspective can help ensure the final plan balances efficiency with meaningful community participation.


Consider making a submission if you have views on:

  • whether the proposed framework strikes the right balance between consistency and local flexibility.

  • the adequacy of participation opportunities at both strategic and development stages.

  • the potential impact of reduced consultation for low-impact development.

  • how the quality and purpose of engagement can be strengthened beyond minimum statutory requirements.

  • the practical implications for councils and project delivery.



Author.

Kelly Lofberg is an engagement and communications professional, who specialises in complex and issues rich environments. Bringing innovative ways to solve problems is her jam. Sometimes Kel brings LEGO® too.


About Mara

Mara Consulting is a Newcastle based communications and stakeholder engagement consultancy specialising in community consultation, social impact assessment and strategic communications for infrastructure, renewable energy and property development projects across NSW.


 
 
 

Comments

bottom of page