TAP Coffs Harbour
Open in Telegram
Connection our Community https://theaustraliaproject.org https://www.tapcoffsharbour.com
Show more528
Subscribers
No data24 hours
No data7 days
-430 days
Data loading in progress...
Similar Channels
Tags Cloud
Incoming and Outgoing Mentions
---
---
---
---
---
---
Attracting Subscribers
June '26
June '26
+3
in 0 channels
May '26
+4
in 0 channels
Get PRO
April '26
+4
in 0 channels
Get PRO
March '26
+7
in 0 channels
Get PRO
February '26
+9
in 0 channels
Get PRO
January '26
+14
in 0 channels
Get PRO
December '25
+11
in 0 channels
Get PRO
November '25
+5
in 1 channels
Get PRO
October '25
+1
in 0 channels
Get PRO
September '25
+1
in 0 channels
Get PRO
August '25
+1
in 0 channels
Get PRO
July '25
+7
in 0 channels
Get PRO
June '25
+1
in 0 channels
Get PRO
May '250
in 0 channels
Get PRO
April '25
+2
in 0 channels
Get PRO
March '25
+6
in 0 channels
Get PRO
February '25
+3
in 0 channels
Get PRO
January '250
in 0 channels
Get PRO
December '24
+4
in 0 channels
Get PRO
November '24
+3
in 0 channels
Get PRO
October '24
+7
in 0 channels
Get PRO
September '24
+3
in 0 channels
Get PRO
August '24
+6
in 0 channels
Get PRO
July '24
+4
in 0 channels
Get PRO
June '24
+5
in 0 channels
Get PRO
May '24
+2
in 0 channels
Get PRO
April '24
+10
in 0 channels
Get PRO
March '24
+4
in 0 channels
Get PRO
February '24
+1
in 0 channels
Get PRO
January '24
+1
in 0 channels
Get PRO
December '23
+1
in 0 channels
Get PRO
November '230
in 0 channels
Get PRO
October '23
+6
in 0 channels
Get PRO
September '23
+7
in 0 channels
Get PRO
August '23
+4
in 0 channels
Get PRO
July '23
+5
in 0 channels
Get PRO
June '23
+4
in 0 channels
Get PRO
May '23
+4
in 0 channels
Get PRO
April '23
+5
in 0 channels
Get PRO
March '23
+8
in 0 channels
Get PRO
February '23
+10
in 0 channels
Get PRO
January '23
+16
in 0 channels
Get PRO
December '22
+9
in 0 channels
Get PRO
November '22
+12
in 0 channels
Get PRO
October '22
+9
in 0 channels
Get PRO
September '22
+9
in 0 channels
Get PRO
August '22
+10
in 0 channels
Get PRO
July '22
+15
in 0 channels
Get PRO
June '22
+16
in 0 channels
Get PRO
May '22
+37
in 0 channels
Get PRO
April '22
+29
in 0 channels
Get PRO
March '22
+49
in 0 channels
Get PRO
February '22
+35
in 0 channels
Get PRO
January '22
+81
in 0 channels
Get PRO
December '21
+133
in 0 channels
Get PRO
November '21
+421
in 0 channels
Get PRO
October '21
+417
in 0 channels
| Date | Subscriber Growth | Mentions | Channels | |
| 09 June | 0 | |||
| 08 June | +1 | |||
| 07 June | 0 | |||
| 06 June | 0 | |||
| 05 June | 0 | |||
| 04 June | 0 | |||
| 03 June | +1 | |||
| 02 June | +1 | |||
| 01 June | 0 |
Channel Posts
| 2 | Such proposals, of course, are ambitious. They require not only technical feasibility, but political will, public engagement, and careful transition planning. The speakers were clear that this is not a project for immediate execution, but for deliberate development. A multi-year process, involving consultation, research, and democratic endorsement, is envisaged.
Central to this process is the creation of an independent institute—tasked with translating the conceptual framework of the book into detailed policy. This body would engage with experts, communities, and stakeholders, producing a series of refined proposals that could form the basis of a political platform. Ultimately, the question of secession would return, as it did in 1933, to the people.
And here, perhaps, lies the most important insight of all. This is not merely a discussion about Western Australia. It is a reflection on the nature of sovereignty itself—not as a legal construct, but as a lived experience. Sovereignty resides not only in parliaments and constitutions, but in the capacity of individuals to think freely, to speak openly, and to participate meaningfully in the decisions that shape their lives.
Systems may constrain, institutions may regulate, but the human spirit, when awakened, resists subjugation.
In the end, this chapter is not about secession alone. It is about reclamation—the reclaiming of agency, of responsibility, of health, of community, and of truth. Whether or not Western Australia ultimately chooses to chart an independent course, the questions raised here will not easily be set aside.
For they speak to something deeper than politics. They speak to the enduring human desire to live not merely within a system, but within a society that reflects our highest values.
And that, perhaps, is the conversation that has only just begun.
#### Ian Brighthope | 0 |
| 3 | Yet the critique extended beyond the immediate circumstances of the pandemic. It reached into the deeper structure of the healthcare system itself. What we have constructed, it was argued, is not a health system, but a disease management system—one that excels in intervention, yet falters in prevention. We have become adept at placing ambulances at the bottom of the cliff, while neglecting to build the fence at the top.
The implications of this are profound. A system oriented toward chronic disease management inevitably aligns with economic models that reward ongoing treatment rather than lasting wellness. Pharmaceuticals, diagnostics, and interventions become the engines of the system, while nutrition, lifestyle, and environmental factors—arguably the true determinants of health—remain marginalised.
To reorient such a system requires more than policy adjustment. It requires a philosophical shift—from illness to health, from dependency to empowerment, from centralisation to personal responsibility.
This theme of centralisation—and its consequences—recurred throughout the presentation. Over recent decades, the expansion of government into areas once occupied by community has altered the social fabric. Tasks that were once shared among neighbours, families, and local networks have been formalised, regulated, and, in many cases, monetised. The result is not merely administrative inefficiency, but a subtle erosion of social cohesion.
Communities, it was suggested, have been relieved of responsibility, but also of agency. The quiet acts of mutual support—the checking of a neighbour’s mail, the informal care of children, the shared stewardship of place—have given way to transactional relationships mediated by systems and services. In this shift, something intangible but vital has been lost.
The proposed remedy is not the abolition of government, but its recalibration. A return to subsidiarity—to the principle that decisions should be made at the most local level possible—offers a pathway toward restoring both responsibility and connection. It is, in essence, a call to rebuild society from the ground up, rather than to manage it from the top down.
Education, too, was brought into focus as a domain in need of renewal. Once centred on the development of fundamental skills and civic understanding, it is now seen by some as fragmented, ideologically influenced, and disconnected from practical realities. The decline of apprenticeship pathways, the expansion of university systems beyond their optimal scale, and the diminishing emphasis on core competencies were all cited as evidence of drift.
To educate, in its truest sense, is not merely to impart information, but to cultivate understanding—to enable individuals to know themselves, to recognise their strengths, and to participate meaningfully in society. This, it was argued, has been overshadowed by institutional priorities that prioritise scale, credentialism, and conformity.
Overlaying these social and institutional critiques is a powerful economic argument. Western Australia, rich in natural resources and productive capacity, is portrayed as contributing disproportionately to the national economy while receiving comparatively less in return. The fiscal imbalance—quantified in tens of billions of dollars—forms a central plank of the case for reconsidering the current federation.
The proposed alternative is not isolation, but reconfiguration. A sovereign Western Australia, it is suggested, could implement a simplified tax system, reduce bureaucratic overhead, and align its economic policies more closely with its unique strengths. The introduction of a local currency, the reduction of income and corporate taxes, and the creation of a leaner governmental structure are all presented as elements of a new economic model. | 0 |
| 4 | ### A Nation Reimagined — Sovereignty, Health, and the Reclaiming of the People
There are moments in history when a society is compelled to pause—not by choice, but by consequence—and ask itself a question both simple and profound: “Who are we, and who do we serve?” It is in such moments that the architecture of governance, long assumed to be stable, reveals its fractures. Institutions once trusted begin to appear distant. Policies once accepted begin to feel imposed. And the individual—the citizen, the patient, the parent—begins to sense that something essential has been lost.
The presentation that unfolded before us was not merely a discussion of a book. It was, in its essence, an invitation to reconsider the very foundations upon which modern Australian society has been constructed. At its core lay a proposition both bold and deeply historical: that Western Australia might once again contemplate its sovereignty—not as an act of rebellion, but as an act of restoration; an act of reformation.
This was not framed as a sudden rupture, nor as a reckless departure from federation. Rather, it was presented as the continuation of a long, unfinished conversation—one that stretches back to the earliest days of Australian federation itself. In 1900, when Western Australia was asked to join the Commonwealth, the decision was neither unanimous nor deeply participatory. A limited electorate, heavily influenced by transient populations drawn by gold rather than rooted in the land, cast a vote that would bind generations to come. Even then, the seeds of ambivalence were sown.
Three decades later, in 1933, the people of Western Australia spoke again—this time with clarity. A decisive majority voted in favour of secession. Yet, despite this democratic expression, the result was never enacted. It remains one of the most striking examples in Australian political history of a popular mandate left unrealised. The question, therefore, is not whether secession is a new idea. It is whether an old and unresolved mandate is now being reconsidered in light of contemporary realities.
Those realities, as articulated by the speakers, are defined by a growing dissonance between the governed and those who govern. Central to this critique is the perception that modern institutions have drifted from their original purpose. Governments, once intended to serve the people, are increasingly seen as serving systems—bureaucratic, financial, and political—that operate at a distance from the lived experience of ordinary citizens.
Nowhere was this more forcefully expressed than in the discussion of the COVID-19 era. For many, this period served as a crucible—a moment in which the principles of democracy, medical ethics, and individual liberty were tested under extraordinary pressure. The argument presented was not merely that mistakes were made. It was that the guiding framework itself had shifted. Policies were enacted not solely on the basis of human welfare, but within a matrix of institutional interests, risk aversion, and, at times, economic opportunism.
Lockdowns, mandates, and restrictions were described as policies that, rather than being subjected to rigorous cost–benefit analysis, were implemented in a climate of urgency and fear. In this environment, dissent—particularly from within the medical profession—was not simply discouraged, but actively constrained. The right of clinicians to exercise independent judgment, and to communicate openly with patients, was curtailed.
This, the speakers argued, represents a fundamental breach of medical ethics. Informed consent—long regarded as a cornerstone of clinical practice—cannot exist where information is filtered, debate is suppressed, and choice is constrained. The restoration of medical freedom, therefore, emerges not as a peripheral issue, but as a central pillar of any meaningful reform. | 0 |
| 5 | Those councillors who support the developers in the Jetty Foreshores plan spent a lot of time at last night’s meeting trying to discredit the poll which showed that 68.8% of the voting community rejected the government plan. They put forward a number of flimsy reasons why the vote shouldn’t be recognised but the one thing they won’t talk about or allow debate about is the result 68.8% a landslide in any calculation.
The other thing they won’t debate is the result of the government’s recent consultation process where 61% of the 1700+ responses were against the proposed development. Our method of electing councillors allows for a group to be elected which results in that group voting together at council meetings. This is what is happening now where we have the gang of five voting together to block discussion on the Jetty Foreshores.
It might be time for the community to have a discussion on examining the options for future council elections. These options are:
A local government area can be either:
undivided, where the councillors are elected by all voters in that area, or
divided, where the council is divided into wards, from which an equal number of councillors are elected for each ward.
Option two might be a way of guarding against a similar situation that exists now where we have gangs of five. | 0 |
| 6 | Further to my comments regarding last night's council meeting, it now seems that the council has a new rule that allows a councillor to move that a motion which has been moved by another councillor be put to the vote.
This means that the original motion has to be put to the vote without debate. This is the tactic that the gang of five used at last night's meeting to stifle debate on the Jetty Foreshores. All of this of course in the interests of transparency.
This is a tactic that can be used when you don't have an intelligent argument against the motion which is being put. This is apparently what some of our councillors now believe is democracy.
What it really is, is another attack on the democratic system and total disrespect for the wishes of the people of Coffs Harbour. It was so obvious that this tactic had been planned before the meeting and that in my opinion, some in the council prefer to support wealthy developers rather than the Coffs Harbour Community. Is this what we want from our council, which we elected to represent our wishes?
If you are incensed by this, please act now. Write to the council and express your concerns. They get away with this because we do nothing. | 0 |
| 7 | For some years now I have been observing the slow demise of democracy, sadly tonight at the Coffs Harbour City council meeting I witnessed its death. It didn’t just die, it was executed by the gang of five within the council.
We heard intelligent and impassioned presentations by councillors Judge and Cassell in support of the people of Coffs Harbour regarding the NSW government’s Jetty Foreshores redevelopment project, urging the council to oppose the plan. In what appeared to be a pre organised decision the gang of five voted against the people who they are supposed to be representing. The defeat of these motions was strongly rejected by the large gallery who were repeatedly warned by an aggressive mayor that they would be ejected from the meeting if they continued to show their disapproval. A mayor who says she champions transparency.
Despite the disgraceful disrespect for the Coffs Harbour Community, this fight is not over yet. Personally it spurs me on to take more action to save the most iconic area of Coffs Harbour, our Jetty Foreshores.
I sincerely hope that more people will also take action in demanding that our council and our state member,will begin to do their job and listen to the people. This will only happen if more of us stand up and bring pressure to bear on the people we have elected to represent us. Maybe in this way democracy can be miraculously resurrected..
George Christinson | 0 |
| 8 | https://open.substack.com/pub/lovebrook/p/i-thought-it-would-be-really-easy?utm_campaign=post-expanded-share&utm_medium=web | 0 |
| 9 | Dear Mayor Williams,
With respect, I’m writing to you concerning the proposed redevelopment of the Jetty Foreshores by the NSW government which your council is supporting. I want to start by reminding you of the opening paragraph of the Australian Constitution which says:
WHEREAS the people of New South Wales ……………..
This is a clear indication that it is the people of this country who control what happens in it and politicians and councilors are the servants of the people who elect them to carry out their wishes. This is a fact that seems to be lost on those who are elected to office in today’s environment.
The people of Coffs Harbour have clearly indicated to you and your council via the poll at council election time and also in the recent government feedback where 61% of responses were against the proposal. The people have clearly said that they do not approve of residences being built on the East side of the railway line.
I want to let you know that I respect you and the other councillors who I’m sure are good people and try to do their best. However on this occasion it is they who are not respecting the people of Coffs Harbour by ignoring their clear message regarding the Jetty Foreshore redevelopment.
May I remind you that it is councilors’ responsibility and duty to listen to the people and to carry out the will of the majority as is required under a democratic system of governance. The majority have clearly indicated their wishes on this issue and it is therefore incumbent on your council to reject the Government plan and support the people who elected you to represent them at the local level.
Yours sincerely ,
George Christinson | 0 |
| 10 | I attended the public forum at the council chambers tonight and was very impressed with the presentations by Bruce Weir and Garth MacIlvray who spoke passionately on behalf of the people of Coffs Harbour regarding the redevelopment of the Jetty Foreshores.
Despite the fact that 68% of the electors of Coffs Harbour voted NO to the Government's plan and 61% of responders to the government’s call for responses from the public were against the proposal, a certain block of our council still refuses to respect the will of the people. Councilors like politicians are there to represent the will of the people and the people have spoken very clearly and overwhelmingly on this issue and the verdict is NO.
The only reason our elected representatives continue to ignore and disrespect us is because most of us do nothing. The Jetty Foreshores For All group has fought long and hard to protect the jetty Foreshores for us and for those who follow us but they need us to join with them to raise community support and show those councillors who support the government plan that the people are not taking this any more,
I do not speak on behalf of the Jetty Foreshore group, I speak as a resident and voter of the Coffs Harbour area and I urge people to write to the council and let your feelings be known. We have to make a stand against all our elected representatives who do not respect our wishes now and not wait for the next election which will be too late. Once residences are constructed east of the railway line this iconic part of Coffs Harbour will be lost forever. Please don’t let this happen.
Councilors can be contacted through their emails which are available on the council web page. | 0 |
| 11 | https://johnanderson.net.au/why-the-west-condemns-israel-but-ignores-iranians-brendan-oneill/ | 0 |
| 12 | https://youtu.be/2Z06n-4ircs?si=UKMeuFtrczuhpiYu | 0 |
| 13 | January 2026 - Article provided by Jetty Foreshores - Let's Own Our Future
𝘼𝙉 𝙄𝙉𝘾𝙊𝙉𝙑𝙀𝙉𝙄𝙀𝙉𝙏 𝙏𝙍𝙐𝙏𝙃
Anyone who gave more than a perfunctory glance to the 𝙏𝙍𝘼𝙁𝙁𝙄𝘾 𝘼𝙉𝘿 𝙋𝘼𝙍𝙆𝙄𝙉𝙂 𝙄𝙈𝙋𝘼𝘾𝙏 𝘼𝙎𝙎𝙀𝙎𝙎𝙈𝙀𝙉𝙏 that accompanied PDNSW's Planning Proposal for the Coffs Harbour Jetty Foreshore, had to be aware that it was a deeply, deeply flawed document.
In relation to parking, the consultants played every trick in the book to claim spaces existed that weren't actually available. They needed to do this to account for the admitted 300 space shortfall in PDNSW's plans.
I'm not a rocket surgeon and I know there were plenty of other people who highlighted this issue in their submissions.
The following is from my submission :
"𝐓𝐡𝐞𝐫𝐞 𝐚𝐫𝐞 𝐚 𝐥𝐚𝐫𝐠𝐞 𝐧𝐮𝐦𝐛𝐞𝐫 𝐨𝐟 𝐜𝐚𝐫𝐩𝐚𝐫𝐤𝐬 𝐰𝐢𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐩𝐫𝐞𝐜𝐢𝐧𝐜𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐜𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐫 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐬𝐩𝐞𝐜𝐢𝐟𝐢𝐜 𝐧𝐞𝐞𝐝𝐬 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐜𝐚𝐧𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐛𝐞 𝐜𝐥𝐚𝐬𝐬𝐢𝐟𝐢𝐞𝐝 𝐚𝐬 𝐠𝐞𝐧𝐞𝐫𝐚𝐥 𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐦𝐮𝐧𝐢𝐭𝐲 𝐨𝐫 𝐩𝐮𝐛𝐥𝐢𝐜 𝐩𝐚𝐫𝐤𝐢𝐧𝐠. 𝐈𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐜𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐠𝐨𝐫𝐲 𝐚𝐫𝐞 𝟒𝟐 s𝐩𝐚𝐜𝐞𝐬 𝐨𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐢𝐧𝐧𝐞𝐫 𝐰𝐚𝐥𝐥 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐦𝐚𝐫𝐢𝐧𝐚. 𝐓𝐡𝐞𝐬𝐞 𝐬𝐩𝐚𝐜𝐞𝐬 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐯𝐢𝐝𝐞 𝐢𝐦𝐦𝐞𝐝𝐢𝐚𝐭𝐞 𝐚𝐜𝐜𝐞𝐬𝐬 𝐭𝐨 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐛𝐨𝐚𝐭𝐬 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐟𝐢𝐬𝐡𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐟𝐥𝐞𝐞𝐭, 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐢𝐫 𝐮𝐬𝐞 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐠𝐞𝐧𝐞𝐫𝐚𝐥 𝐩𝐚𝐫𝐤𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐬𝐡𝐨𝐮𝐥𝐝 𝐛𝐞 𝐚𝐜𝐭𝐢𝐯𝐞𝐥𝐲 𝐝𝐢𝐬𝐜𝐨𝐮𝐫𝐚𝐠𝐞𝐝, 𝐭𝐨 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐞𝐱𝐭𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐚 𝐩𝐞𝐫𝐦𝐢𝐭 𝐬𝐲𝐬𝐭𝐞𝐦 𝐦𝐚𝐲 𝐧𝐞𝐞𝐝 𝐭𝐨 𝐛𝐞 𝐢𝐧𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐭𝐮𝐭𝐞𝐝 𝐭𝐨 𝐚𝐥𝐥𝐨𝐰 𝐟𝐢𝐬𝐡𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐛𝐨𝐚𝐭 𝐨𝐰𝐧𝐞𝐫/𝐨𝐩𝐞𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐨𝐫𝐬 𝐭𝐨 𝐚𝐜𝐜𝐞𝐬𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐢𝐫 𝐛𝐨𝐚𝐭𝐬. 𝐈𝐭 𝐢𝐬 𝐚𝐥𝐬𝐨 𝐧𝐨𝐭𝐞𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐬 “𝐟𝐢𝐧𝐠𝐞𝐫” 𝐢𝐬 𝐞𝐱𝐭𝐫𝐞𝐦𝐞𝐥𝐲 𝐧𝐚𝐫𝐫𝐨𝐰 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐨𝐟𝐭𝐞𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐫𝐞 𝐢𝐬 𝐧𝐨 𝐨𝐩𝐩𝐨𝐫𝐭𝐮𝐧𝐢𝐭𝐲 𝐭𝐨 𝐭𝐮𝐫𝐧 𝐚𝐫𝐨𝐮𝐧𝐝 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐝𝐫𝐢𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐬 𝐦𝐚𝐲 𝐧𝐞𝐞𝐝 𝐭𝐨 𝐛𝐚𝐜𝐤 𝐨𝐮𝐭 𝐚𝐥𝐨𝐧𝐠 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐰𝐚𝐥𝐥. 𝐈𝐭 𝐢𝐬 𝐚𝐧 𝐮𝐧𝐝𝐞𝐫𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐭𝐨 𝐝𝐞𝐬𝐜𝐫𝐢𝐛𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐚𝐬 𝐬𝐮𝐛-𝐨𝐩𝐭𝐢𝐦𝐚𝐥. 𝐑𝐞𝐠𝐚𝐫𝐝𝐥𝐞𝐬𝐬 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐬, 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐥𝐞𝐧𝐠𝐭𝐡 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐥𝐢𝐧𝐞𝐚𝐫 𝐜𝐚𝐫𝐩𝐚𝐫𝐤 𝐡𝐚𝐬 𝐛𝐞𝐞𝐧 𝐠𝐫𝐨𝐬𝐬𝐥𝐲 𝐨𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐝 𝐚𝐬 𝐢𝐭 𝐟𝐢𝐧𝐢𝐬𝐡𝐞𝐬 𝐚𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐞𝐚𝐬𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐧 𝐞𝐧𝐝 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐍𝐒𝐖 𝐌𝐀𝐑𝐈𝐓𝐈𝐌𝐄 𝐛𝐮𝐢𝐥𝐝𝐢𝐧𝐠 (𝐬𝐞𝐞 𝐩𝐡𝐨𝐭𝐨 𝐛𝐞𝐥𝐨𝐰) 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐢𝐭 𝐢𝐬 𝐦𝐲 𝐛𝐞𝐥𝐢𝐞𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐢𝐭 𝐨𝐧𝐥𝐲 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐯𝐢𝐝𝐞𝐬 𝟑𝟐 𝐬𝐩𝐚𝐜𝐞𝐬 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝟒𝟐 𝐜𝐥𝐚𝐢𝐦𝐞𝐝."
So now, just a few weeks after finding out that we are not going to learn how PDNSW has responded to our legitimate grievances to their plan until after they have made their final decision, I find that a gate has been erected at the landward end of the inner wall of the marina as per the photo below.
I need to be abundantly clear that I support the erection of this gate for the benefit of police, emergency services and the fishing fleet.
As I said earlier, I am not a rocket surgeon and you don't need to be one to recognise that parking on that wall was never public parking, and to claim it as such, was just another exercise in gas lighting this community by the spivs and charlatans engaged by the government to get their flawed proposal across the line.
Cheryl_06
P2223275-2_1024x305
The Fight For the Foreshore continues:
The Foreshore For All campaign team of supporters never rest and continue to research, investigate, plan, strategise and publicise every aspect of the proposal to steal the public land at the Jetty Foreshore.
Keep the Foreshore For All, Not For the Few.
LOGO_Long_Reverse_800x600
Further information
Further in depth information regarding the Jetty Foreshore multi-level residential development can be found on our FFA web page , our Facebook page and also on the Jetty Foreshores - Let's Own Our Future Facebook group which provides a wealth of factual information to the community on this important issue.
Thank you for your support,
The Foreshore For All Committee
Please visit the Foreshore For All website.
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Foreshoreforall/
Email: info@foreshoreforall.com | 0 |
| 14 | November 2025 - Submission Update
Although being originally advised that the content of the submissions would be available for viewing after the submission period closed, this has not occurred and no date has been provided as to when they will be available for viewing or the outcome of the submission assessment.
Remember when we all put in a huge effort in June to make submissions re the 'Jetty Foreshore Revitalisation' proposal by Property Development NSW? (Spectacular effort Coffs Harbour community by the way)
Since the closing of the submission period, we have been eager to know when we would be provided with the important results of the submission process. To this end, on October 1st, 3 months since the submissions closed, we emailed the Planning Minister Paul Scully and the Planning Department requesting an update. It is indeed unfortunate and disappointing, that as of today the 25th of November, we have not had a reply to our questions.
If you would also like to know the answers to the questions in our email, consider writing yourself. Contact details at end of post.
Here is our letter...
Dear Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure,
Foreshore For all Inc. is writing to you to request an update on the progress of the Coffs Harbour Jetty Foreshore Rezoning Proposal.
In a poll conducted at the September 2024 local government election, 69% voted “NO’ to multi-level private residential at the Coffs Jetty Foreshore. As this overwhelming result demonstrates, the people of Coffs Harbour are taking a great interest in the progress of the submissions, and the future of the public land at the Coffs Jetty Foreshore.
We request that the Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure keep the community informed by making a public statement providing:
• The expected date of the release of the details of the submissions
• The expected date of release of any assessment of the submissions
• The expected date of release of information related to the department’s decision to proceed or not with the rezoning proposal
Best Regards,
Foreshore For All Inc.
FFA did receive a reply to our letter, but unfortunately none of these very specific and very important questions were addressed. | 0 |
| 15 | Ask the NSW Government why is not taking the most direct steps to provide affordable housing for Mid-North Coast residents and meet its 2029 housing target
Insist the NSW Government keep its 2022 election commitment to remove residential development from the revitalisation of the Coffs Harbour Jetty Precinct
It is not clear to anyone why the NSW Government is so committed to pushing for long-term luxury residential development on land that the community has repeatedly said it wants to revitalise for ongoing public use.
August 2025 - Article provided by Jetty Foreshores - Let's Own Our Future
BUDGET ESTIMATE QUESTIONS APPLY MORE PRESSURE
Sue Higginson, Member of the Legislative council has again been applying pressure in Budget Estimates, this time to Paul Scully, Minister for Planning and Public Spaces.
Uncle Reg Craig has invited various Ministers and public servants to come to Coffs Harbour and walk on country with him, and listen to his concerns.
Click link for excerpt from the transcript.
https://www.facebook.com/share/p/18RjixLho6/
August 2025 - Article provided by Jetty Foreshores - Let's Own Our Future
WHAT’S HAPPENED WITH OUR SUBMISSIONS?
On 27 August 2025, I sought clarification from the Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure as to the process regarding the submissions received in relation to the Planning Proposal for the Coffs Harbour Jetty Foreshores.
I received the following reply on 1 September 2025:
“Thank you for contacting us regarding the submission review process for the Coffs Harbour Jetty Foreshore Rezoning Proposal.
Property and Development NSW (PDNSW) are the proponent for the Rezoning Proposal. They have submitted the proposal to the Department of Planning, Housing, and Infrastructure for assessment.
The Department has reviewed the submissions and shared them with PDNSW who are now preparing a Response to Submissions document. The Response to Submissions will be shared with the Department to consider in the finalisation of the proposal. Individual responses to feedback are not provided as part of the submission process.
Once the Response to Submissions has been received, the Department will assess the proposal, and the Minister for Planning and Public Spaces will make a final determination. The Department will publish a Finalisation Report, and all submissions received to the NSW Planning Portal once the rezoning proposal has been assessed and determined.
Note that if the proposal is approved, PDNSW are required to submit development applications to the City of Coffs Harbour prior to any development starting.
We appreciate your continued interest in this process. If we can provide any further information on the Departments role in this process, please do not hesitate to contact us.
Kind Regards,
Rezoning Pathways Project Team | State Rezoning
Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure
October 2025 - Article provided by Jetty Foreshores - Let's Own Our Future
THE CURRENT STATE OF PLAY REGARDING SUBMISSIONS
On 10 September 2025, I posted that I had forwarded an email on 3 September, 2025, to the Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure for further information regarding the review of submissions.
I received the following reply on 11 September, 2025:
” The Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure (the Department) provided all community submissions received during the exhibition period to Property and Development NSW (PDNSW). Along with the submissions, the Department included a summary of common concerns raised by the community, identified key issues relating to the proposed rezoning and requested a response from PDNSW addressing the matters raised.
Further updates on this precinct will be published to the NSW Planning Portal.”
Click link for full article...
https://www.facebook.com/share/p/1GTKQpP8jR/ | 0 |
| 16 | I write to draw your attention to recent actions that raise serious questions about the sincerity of the Minns Government’s commitment to addressing the housing affordability and supply crisis in our state.
Why has the Government rejected an accessible and affordable ready-to-build housing proposal in favour of a luxury beachside apartment development which is overwhelmingly opposed by the community and requiring substantial investment in infrastructure?
In November 2023, the Coffs Harbour City Council (CHCC) wrote to Minister for Lands and Property, Steve Kamper MP offering 2 prime blocks of Coffs Harbour CBD land for the government to use to help address the state’s housing shortage. The land was zoned for 14-storey buildings with existing access to utilities, allowing for more than 100 new apartments close to workplaces, amenities and public transport.
It is hard to envisage an offer better suited to helping the NSW Government meet its commitment to 55,000 new homes in regional NSW by 2029.
The proposal included $6.7 million in exchange for government-owned land on the Coffs Harbour foreshore, which the council proposed to upgrade and maintain as valuable open space public for use by residents and visitors.
The CHCC offer was more than triple the $2.3 million paid by Property & Development NSW to Transport for NSW for the same land just a month earlier (October 2023).
Local media accurately described the proposal as a ‘golden goose’ offer.
However, on 25 January 2024, Minister Kamper responded that the offer would not be accepted.
Instead, he informed CHCC that the Government would continue to press ahead with residential development at the Coffs Harbour Jetty Foreshore Precinct.
It’s important to note some details about the proposed foreshore development:
Property & Development NSW has repeatedly emphasised that it is a 20-year project and any residential development is expected to occur over a long period (at this stage the rezoning is not expected to be completed until the end of 2026)
The land doesn’t have adequate power, sewage or water supply and will need significant investment before any housing can be built
The proposal doesn’t include affordable housing commitments
The government has said there are no developers committed to this project and they have not had discussions to explore interest
There is very limited public transport servicing the area
The Aboriginal community has asked for no multi-storey residential development to be included in the harbour-side precinct, which has deep historic and cultural significance
70% of the Coffs Harbour community from all age groups and demographics has said ‘no’ to residential apartments on their most popular recreational land, a site for picnics, markets, sport and relaxation
Local real estate agents have valued the proposed harbour-side apartments at millions of dollars
When questioned on local radio on 18 July 2025 about the reasoning behind the Foreshore development, Premier Chris Minns said he expected it would have a ‘cascade effect’ on housing in the area. Someone needs to inform him that trickle down housing is a widely discredited theory shown to have increased the cost of housing in places such as California.
Rejecting the opportunity to provide more than 100 ready-to-build accessible and affordable homes in favour of a possible 20-year luxury trickle-down effect means NSW is not getting the housing it needs for the people who need it today.
The Coffs Harbour CBD land is still available.
I respectfully urge you to: | 0 |
| 17 | July 2025 - Property Development NSW has advised they will not be making any financial provisions for modifications to the local Jetty suburban streets to accommodate additional traffic movements. It is expected that Camperdown St, as one of the only two access options, can expect nearly 600 vehicle movements an hour on weekends if the development goes ahead. Suburban streets and intersections in the local area will experience significant increase in traffic movements.
PDNSW also advised that if there is any shortage of parking in the Jetty Foreshore precinct after the development, then visitors to the foreshore can park in the suburban streets west of the railway line.
August 2025 - Coffs Jetty Foreshore Rezoning Proposal - SUBMISSION INFORMATION UPDATE...
Recently, representatives from Foreshore For All (FFA) requested a meeting with the Ms Kirsten Fishburn secretary of NSW Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure.
During the meeting, the FFA representatives were able to obtain information on the recent submission process. FFA was advised that 1700 submissions were received on the Jetty Precinct proposal. As a consequence of the large number of submissions and the need to address them, PDNSW (Property Development NSW) do not expect any further report until this time next year.
At the conclusion of the public exhibition period, and in view of the widespread reports of the failure of the Department of Planning's website to adequately manage the lodgement of submissions, FFA lodged a complaint on 11/07/2025 with the department, regarding the 'PDNSW Coffs Harbour Jetty Foreshore Rezoning proposal flawed submission process'. The letter included examples of some of the many reports we received from people who experienced failures with the Planning Department website.
August 2025 - Article from Jetty Foreshores - Let's Own Our Future
THE PRESSURE IS STILL ON!!
Steve Kamper, Minister for Lands and Property, was backed into a corner yesterday by Sue Higginson, Member of the New South Wales Legislative Council. Sue Higginson has been of great assistance in efforts to stop the State Government’s plans for the Jetty Foreshore.
The transcript relating to Sue Higginson and Steve Kamper’s interaction is as follows:
“Ms Sue Higginson: I just want to turn in the last minute to the development of the Coffs Jetty Foreshore. Are you aware that the traditional custodians, the cultural authority holders, are vehemently against the proposal of developing that very important public and culturally significant lands into private house development?
Mr Stephen Kamper: There’s been consultation throughout the whole process with the custodians.
Ms Sue Higginson: Are you aware that they are vehemently opposed?
Mr Stephen Kamper: I’ve had conflicting feedback in relation to that. I think probably Leon would be more familiar with that.
Ms Sue Higginson: Minister, have you met with any custodians yourself?
Mr Stephen Kamper: No, I haven’t.
Ms Sue Higginson: Would you be willing to? There’s some incredible First Nations leaders that would love to meet with you, talk to you on their country about the importance of that land. Would you do that?
Mr Stephen Kamper: Yes, absolutely.”
The Minister has now given a definite commitment to a meeting with the traditional custodians, whose authorised spokesperson is Uncle Reg Craig. Providing Minister Kamper follows through with his commitment, there will be the chance for the elders to speak with him first hand, and for Minister Kamper to walk on country and to hear what they have to say.
For far too long, Ministers have relied on advice from senior public servants, who it would seem only relay their version of events, as their assigned role is to ensure that the Jetty Revitalisation project succeeds.
We must ensure that Minister Kamper meets with the Aboriginal Elders sooner rather than later.
August 2025 -
FFA wrote to each upper and lower house member of NSW parliament to raise the issue of the lack of affordable housing... | 0 |
| 18 | LOGO_Inc_Long_Reverse_02
Hi Foreshore Guardian George,
Please forward this email to any supportive contacts.
In this edition of the Foreshore For All Inc. Newsletter
Foreshore For All becomes incorporated
Support the campaign - become a member
Parklands for communities - How it's being done. Ideas and Suggestions
Activity and information update
Foreshore For All becomes Foreshore For All Inc.
Yes, FFA is now incorporated. Incorporation will enable the campaign to have increased authority and weight as an entity if legal action regarding the Foreshore is required to be initiated in the future.
As part of the incorporation process, Foreshore For All Inc. needs its supporters to sign up as members. The membership fee is a low $10 per member. Funds raised through membership contributions will be needed to pay for event insurance, FOI requests, legal advice, print and digital advertising as well as costs associated with promotional and other campaign activities.
Please join the campaign to support keeping the Foreshore For All. The membership form and instructions can be found here...
https://www.foreshoreforall.com/whats-happening/become-member/
Community Parklands - How it's been done - Ideas and Suggestions...
FFA has been cautious to not suggest any specific plan for how a foreshore enhanced for the community might look. What we do know however is that the Jetty Foreshore land must remain in public hands, and that any improvements must be aligned with the consensus of the community, not dictated by a developer with $$$$ signs in their eyes.
To this end, the FFA team has been researching how other spaces have been enhanced and activated for the benefit of the community. We have linked below a few that demonstrate just how inviting and interesting a space can be that caters for, and delivers on, the needs of the community.
FFA is not suggesting that any idea or suggestion included here is one that should necessarily be adopted, just that the Jetty Foreshore has amazing potential for expansion and enhancement, while retaining it as the most important recreational community owned open public space in the city.
Let's hear about the spaces you have visited or heard about, where changes have been implemented that improve the amenity for the recreation of the community. Email us to let us know what you think would enhance the Foreshore for the use of the community. Here are a few links for you to check out.
*** Blaxland Riverside Park - part of Olympic Park
https://www.sydneyolympicpark.com.au/parks-and-playgrounds/blaxland-riverside-park
*** Central Gardens Nature Reserve
https://www.cumberland.nsw.gov.au/central-gardens-nature-reserve
*** Nurragingy Reserve
https://www.blacktown.nsw.gov.au/Sport-recreation/Parks-and-recreation-directory/Nurragingy-Reserve
Campaign Activity and Information Update...
While the Foreshore For All team and supporters await the results of the Jetty Foreshore Submission assessment, we continue to research, make representations to State Government departments and ask the important questions that the Coffs community want and need to know.
Here is a list of just some of the activities undertaken, and information obtained by FFA and supporters of the campaign.
July 2025 - FFA contacted Janelle Saffin(Minister for the North Coast) twice (July 2025 and October 2025) to request she read the comprehensive FFA submission document and to meet with representatives of FFA, to understand the reasons and breadth of community concern regarding the proposal for multi level private residential at the Jetty Foreshore. Unfortunately, no response was received from Ms Saffin to confirm or agree to either of our requests. | 0 |
| 19 | LOGO_Inc_Long_Reverse_02
Hi Foreshore For All Inc member George,
Now that you are a member of ForeshoreFor All Inc, we would like to let you know that a campaign 'Working Group' meets fortnightly on Thursdays at 12:30pm at the Yacht Club to discuss the next steps and actions in the campaign to Keep the Foreshore for All. Some of the activities we discuss, plan and organise are...
Reports on current activities and correspondence
Campaign strategies
Organisation of events
Allocation of tasks such as letter writing, staffing of stalls to gather petition signatures and new members
Liaising with other supporters and organisations
Suggestions and content for the FFA newsletter and community communications
Below is a table of some of the tasks and teams for which we currently require individuals to contribute.
If you are interested in taking an active role, either small or large, or you think you can assist in the week to week operation of the campaign in any way, then please come along to our next 'Working Group' meeting at 12:30pm on Thursday 29/01/2026, held in the ground floor meeting room at the Yacht Club at the Jetty Foreshore. We would love to see you at the next meeting, to be an active part of this dynamic campaign.
Your ongoing support is much appreciated.
Please let us know if you require further information or have any comments.
Best Regards,
The Foreshore For All Inc. Team
info@foreshoreforall.com
The Fight For the Foreshore continues:
The Foreshore For All campaign team of supporters never rest and continue to research, investigate, plan, strategise and publicise every aspect of the proposal to steal the public land at the Jetty Foreshore.
Keep the Foreshore For All, Not For the Few.
Further information
Further in depth information regarding the Jetty Foreshore multi-level residential development can be found on our FFA web page , our Facebook page and also on the Jetty Foreshores - Let's Own Our Future Facebook group which provides a wealth of factual information to the community on this important issue.
Email: info@foreshoreforall.com
P2223275-2_1024x305 | 0 |
| 20 | https://youtu.be/O5mwH3OTBXk | 0 |
