New South Wales Premier Chris Minns has revealed that changes to the state's planning laws, designed to speed up housing approvals, will also apply to mining and power projects. The move is set to enable new mines and wind and solar farms to be fast-tracked for development.
Critics have long argued that the sweeping reforms would prioritize business interests over environmental concerns, and Minns' admission has only intensified these criticisms. Environmental groups and the Greens have voiced their opposition to the changes, which many see as a recipe for unchecked industrialization.
The planning minister, Paul Scully, had initially avoided discussing mining in his second reading speech, focusing instead on the benefits of accelerated housing approvals. However, Minns has been more explicit about the potential applications of the reforms, claiming that they will facilitate investment in major projects across NSW.
Minns' comments have sparked fierce debate, with Greens MP Sue Higginson accusing him and Scully of misleading parliament and the community about the true intentions behind the changes. She claims that the government has been attempting to push through a "wild west" approach to development, which would ignore environmental safeguards and prioritise business interests above all else.
Despite this backlash, Minns remains committed to the reforms, insisting that they will make NSW an attractive destination for investors and drive economic growth. He has established an Investment Delivery Authority, modelled on the Housing Delivery Authority, to streamline the state's approvals process and provide certainty for developers.
However, Higginson and other critics remain unconvinced, arguing that the changes will only serve to further entrench the power of big business at the expense of environmental protection and community participation. As the debate continues, one thing is clear: the future of NSW's development landscape hangs in the balance.
Critics have long argued that the sweeping reforms would prioritize business interests over environmental concerns, and Minns' admission has only intensified these criticisms. Environmental groups and the Greens have voiced their opposition to the changes, which many see as a recipe for unchecked industrialization.
The planning minister, Paul Scully, had initially avoided discussing mining in his second reading speech, focusing instead on the benefits of accelerated housing approvals. However, Minns has been more explicit about the potential applications of the reforms, claiming that they will facilitate investment in major projects across NSW.
Minns' comments have sparked fierce debate, with Greens MP Sue Higginson accusing him and Scully of misleading parliament and the community about the true intentions behind the changes. She claims that the government has been attempting to push through a "wild west" approach to development, which would ignore environmental safeguards and prioritise business interests above all else.
Despite this backlash, Minns remains committed to the reforms, insisting that they will make NSW an attractive destination for investors and drive economic growth. He has established an Investment Delivery Authority, modelled on the Housing Delivery Authority, to streamline the state's approvals process and provide certainty for developers.
However, Higginson and other critics remain unconvinced, arguing that the changes will only serve to further entrench the power of big business at the expense of environmental protection and community participation. As the debate continues, one thing is clear: the future of NSW's development landscape hangs in the balance.
. I mean, who doesn't love a good economic boost, but at what cost? 
We're talking about our environment and communities here, not just some big business profits. It feels like we're trading one problem for another – all these new mines and solar farms might bring in cash, but what about the impact on local wildlife and water sources? 
It's like they think business interests should be the only thing on the table. That's just not right in my book 
.
It's time for some real discussion and consideration here, not just quick fixes and empty promises 
.
I'm literally living for the new mining projects that are about to get fast-tracked 
but at the same time, I'm low-key scared for our environment 
like, what if we're sacrificing too much for the sake of economic growth? 
It's a tough one, you feel? 
wind farms & solar panels r super important for our planet's future so why r we making it harder 2 get things done? 
at least chris is being upfront about his intentions though lol what a shame 
. I mean, I get that we need more homes and all, but come on! What about our parks and wildlife? We're already losing so much of it to development...it feels like we're just trading one problem for another 
. i mean, don't get me wrong, we need more houses and stuff, but can't we find a balance between progress and taking care of our environment? 
. Mining and solar farms are cool and all, but do we really want to sacrifice our environment for the sake of economic growth? 
at least the greens are speaking truth to power, even if it's a bit dramatic 
this is a bad idea 
. What about our planet's future? 
, there needs to be balance 
.
but we need more transparency 
and public input 
. We can't let big business run wild in NSW 
without considering the consequences 
.
that takes into account environmental impact 
but it's being used to push through changes 
. We need to be careful what we wish for 
because this could backfire 
.
. We can't let politicians rush into decisions without considering all the facts 
. This is a big deal 
.