Urban Taskforce

ABS has today released the June data for housing approvals which shows that in NSW, the planning system approved 12.7% in less in June than was approved in May. The Council shut down for elections has started.

Urban Taskforce has warned the NSW Government that they faced a real risk that Councils would ease off on approvals in the lead up to what was to be the September elections.&nbsp; Today&rsquo;s data shows that the Government&rsquo;s light touch on Councils has resulted in precisely that.&nbsp; Worse, the Council elections have now been postponed till December and unless someone holds a blow-torch to the Councils and approval bodies, approvals will drop off further.&nbsp;

[smartcode_project:default project_id=31751]

Even prior to the lockdown, the productivity of the planning system had dropped off. Our economy cannot recover with this drop off in performance.&nbsp; Planning reform and approvals now will deliver a pipeline of work for when vaccinations allow our economy to fully re-open.&nbsp; There is an opportunity to catch up &ndash; but it seems that the planning system has slowed up again.

Urban Taskforce calls on the Government to immediately implement the recommendation of the NSW Productivity Commission White Paper.&nbsp; The GSC has set housing targets.&nbsp; It is up to the NSW Government to ensure that Councils meet them.&nbsp; Targets need to be regularly monitored against performance.&nbsp; There can be no excuse for Councils refusing to accept the targets.&nbsp; LGA Housing Strategies must come with sanctions for those Councils that selfishly refuse to contribute to housing supply, resulting in rising new home prices inflicted on those least able to afford them.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=30049 project_image_fid=162884]

The data shows that NSW housing approvals reached their peak in 2015/16 2016/17 and 2017/18 at around 73,000 approvals each year. Then, in the lead up to the NSW State election (2018/19) approvals dropped off to 58,000 and stayed low in 2019/20 with only 48,000, despite &ldquo;fast track&rdquo; schemes and a flurry of DPIE activity.

The total approvals have risen across all of NSW to 59,000 and this is welcome &ndash; but it remains well short of what is needed.&nbsp; The data reveals the problem.&nbsp; Apartment approvals across NSW have dropped significantly (most of these in Greater Sydney) while new separated house approvals have remained relatively flat.

<img alt="" height="444" src="https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/pictures/article-images/screen_shot_2021-08-07_at_2.19.12_am.png" width="1180" />

The table above, based on the ABS data, clearly shows that the price escalation is due to a drop off in housing approvals and this is flowing on to a drop off in housing supply.&nbsp;

Further, the time taken to navigate the NSW planning system, even after an approval has been granted, often takes years, adding to risk for the property development industry and additional costs for new home buyers.

The message went out to Councils in 2018 that the NSW Government was going to go soft on them after the Council amalgamation debacle.&nbsp; But the result has been a massive under supply of housing.&nbsp; This will only get worse unless Government can incentivise Councils to deliver an over-supply of new approvals.

Council elections have now been postponed till December and unless someone holds a blow-torch to the Councils and approval bodies, approvals will drop off further. 

max.kwok_55688

ABS housing approvals data spells out why housing prices are going through the roof

The Commonwealth&rsquo;s expansionary budget is the right approach for the times.

The Commonwealth has led the way with support for new home buyers through its &ldquo;First Home-owners Deposit Scheme&rdquo; which effectively under-writes housing loans for first home buyers with only a 5% deposit. &nbsp;However, this, along with record low interest rates and the relaxation of APRA controls has seen a spike in housing demand

The Budget expands this scheme and creates a new category of beneficiaries with the new Family Home Guarantee which will provide single custodial parents with a step up towards home ownership. There&rsquo;s also more flexibility for older Australians (over 60) who sell their house (generally to down-size after children have moved out) allowing them to deposit up to $300,000 per person into Superannuation.

The Budget also includes the expansion of the &ldquo;First Home Super Saver Scheme&rdquo; which increases the funds that can be withdrawn from Super accounts from $30,000 to $50,000. &nbsp;This, on top of HomeBuilder grants all adds to demand for new homes. But without a big boost in housing supply, borrowing from Super just pumps up the price further.

So Treasurer Josh Frydenberg has a conundrum. &nbsp;Stimulate the economy &ndash; but risk new home prices going up and a backlash from those locked out of the housing market. &nbsp;All of the worthy Commonwealth measures announced in the Budget face particular problem in NSW.&nbsp;

The NSW Planning System dropped the ball and slowed housing approvals down to a crawl just before COVID &ndash; then they failed to use COVID-19 as a chance to catch up. &nbsp;Now there is a massive shortage in supply of land sub-divisions and re-zonings for new homes across Greater Sydney. There is a plan for reform of planning in NSW &ndash; but it won&rsquo;t deliver for years to come. The same bold approach which has driven the Commonwealth is urgently needed in NSW.

What that means is all the extra funding for home buyers just pumps up the price of the existing stock of housing, ironically making home ownership less affordable.&nbsp;

<h2>The real issue for NSW is the supply of new housing.</h2>

The Department of Planning&rsquo;s own forecasts predict 150,000 new homes over the next 4 years in Greater Sydney &ndash; but even this bold prediction, unlikely to be achieved given the Government&rsquo;s refusal to take on NIMBY Councils, falls short of meeting the NSW Government&rsquo;s own Housing Strategy &ldquo;Housing 2041&rdquo; targets which call for 50,000 new dwellings (on average) each year from now till 2041.

The big problem for first home buyers and for the Commonwealth Budget is the NSW planning system.

The Commonwealth needs to get tough with NSW and drive planning reform to increase housing supply. &nbsp;While ever we wait for reform in NSW you can expect that new home prices will continue to rise.

The Commonwealth&rsquo;s increased investment public health, the vaccine roll out, mental health and women&rsquo;s support services is all very welcome indeed.

The Commonwealth investment in in city Infrastructure is also supported &ndash; though one short-coming was the absence of funding to support local infrastructure surrounding the new Western Sydney Airport because the success of this precinct will drive the economy of the nation. With a massive levy of 6.5% (on top of all the other fees and charges) to be applied to the development of employment centres around the airport, the feasibility of development of employment land is called into question and NSW risks missing out on the predicted jobs boom without some support from the Commonwealth.

All up, this is a budget for all Australians. It is very welcome and is strongly supported by the Urban Taskforce.

However, all of the worthy Commonwealth measures announced in the Budget face particular problem in NSW

The Commonwealth’s expansionary budget is the right approach for the times: Tom Forrest

<html><body>
EXPERT OBSERVER

The NSW Minister for Planning has released an analysis of housing demand and supply trends which highlights the urgent need for more and faster housing approvals if massive price rises are to be avoided.

Urban Taskforce welcomes the frank assessment which clearly states the need for more housing and more infrastructure to support our growing and ageing population.

DPIE Housing Demand forecasts are based on the Greater Sydney Commission’s (GSC) 2016 numbers – which find the over the next 20 years (2016 – 2036) the number of new homes in Greater Sydney needed will be 725,000 (36,000 per year).

The Draft NSW Housing Strategy Discussion Paper and Fact Book released by Minister Pavey and Minister Stokes in May 2020 was clear that the forecast for Growth in the population of Greater Sydney had grown and so too had the forecast need for new homes.  The May 2020 document is clear in stating that there will need to be 1 million new homes in the 20 years between 2020 and 2040 (that means 50,000 new homes every year).

The big question is: why is DPIE still clinging to the old data?  The 2020 Housing Strategy documents were based on sound analysis by DPIE staff and were informed by Demographic analysis and by the NSW Inter-Generational Report.

The Planning System was slowed by the focus on Strategic Planning documents.  Councils were not supposed to delay rezoning applications while preparing their new Local Environment Plans and their Local Strategic Planning Statements, but they did.

The data released by Minister Stokes today shows the extent of the problem created by the resultant chronic slowdown in approvals prior to COVID-19.

Between 2015-2018 approvals were going well and this, combined with the extension of construction operational hours and the early declaration of construction as an essential service kept this part of the economy working reasonably well.  However, through 2019, before COVID-19, approval numbers were dropping off in NSW.

As shown in the marked-up table, there is a lag between approvals and the completion of new homes.  The impact of the 2019 slowdown (which got worse in 2020 due to COVID-19) is yet to flow through to household completion numbers – but it will – and this will exacerbate the current rising prices in the Greater Sydney market.

<img alt="" height="630" src="https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/pictures/article-images/urban_taskforce_councils.jpg" width="541">

Minister Stokes has sent a clear signal to Councils which are refusing to adopt the GSC 5-year Housing Targets (which are themselves based on the lower 2016 housing forecasts not the more recent May 2020 analysis).  Ryde Council and Ku-ring-gai are the worst offenders. They have publicly rejected the GSC targets. If this flows through to other Councils, housing supply will crash, pushing prices up and costing thousands of jobs in the sector.

The fact that prices are rising despite the drop off in overseas migration reflects the fundamental economic reality: demand is greater than supply, so prices are rising.

The numbers quoted in the Minister’s media release will not meet the May 2020 Draft NSW Housing Strategy forecasts for growth. 

154,550 new home over the next 5 years equates to only 31,000 new homes each year (well below the GSC 2016 forecast requirement of 36,000 per year and a mile away from the 2020 NSW Housing Strategy target of 50,000 new homes per year.

Tom Forrest is the CEO of the Urban Taskforce.

Subsequent to publication Tom Forrest advised The Hills Shires Council had been exemplars in the area of Urban Planning and Housing Supply. 

He sincerely apologised for confusing The Hills Shire Council with Ku-ring-gai in the media statement.

The Council which has been the most opposed to the GSC Housing targets has, of course, been Ku-ring-gai Council.  

GSC set a reasonable 5-year target of 5,000 – 5,500 for Ku-ring-gai Council.  They passed a resolution to change that to 250 (over 5 years).

 
</body></html>

The data released by Minister Stokes shows the extent of the problem created by the resultant chronic slowdown in approvals prior to COVID-19.



Joel Robinson

Minister Stokes lights a fire under NSW council planners to drive housing supply

<html><body>
EXPERT OBSERVER

Urban Taskforce chief executive Tom Forrest has welcomed the National Housing Finance and Investment Corporation (NHFIC) first flagship report producing five-year projections for housing supply and demand across Australia’s major cities and regional areas.

The report identifies some tough choices for politicians.

The Report identifies some short-term affordability improvements for renters and prospective first home buyers as a consequence of lower population growth coupled with COVID-19 stimulus measures.

However, the report also warns that affordability could deteriorate if supply is not responsive to the rebound in demand once migration returns to earlier levels.  This is the biggest risk for the NSW economy and it falls at the feet of the Planning Department.  This is our dilemma. NSW Planning has responded well to COVID – but as 2020 closes it is yet to progress any significant planning reform and many within it would prefer less housing supply, not more.

Housing supply and population growth through migration cannot be seen as an either/or policy choice. We need both and our political leaders should be capable of developing a policy package which supports both. 

The challenge for Sydney’s economic growth is migration. Sydney’s migration levels must return to pre-COVID-19 levels and above to keep the economy moving and generating the tax receipts that we need to pay for the care of the aging population (the baby boomers) many of whom do not have large superannuation balances.

Simply halting the decline in tax-payers as a proportion of the total population requires migration.

Our economic future, and that of hundreds of thousands of workers in the property and construction sector, depend on population growth. Population growth drives economic growth. 

Without significant migration numbers, the ageing of our population (the baby-boomer phenomenon) will leave us with a lower and lower taxpayer base trying to support a bigger and bigger tax bill.

Governments need to re-open borders to investor immigration, skilled immigration, and the return of foreign students; WHILE still supporting a pipeline of housing supply.

The NHFIC report finds the longer term trends of declining affordability are likely to persist, particularly if supply is not responsive to demand when it recovers.

Housing supply also needs to be dramatically increased to create downward pressure on prices. This will mean some tough decisions for Minister Stokes and the Department of Planning.  The local character of suburbs will need to change – or they will change by themselves – as a result of the progressive decay of the city arising from the decline in the economy.
</body></html>

Politicians must “chew gum” and “skip rope”: Urban Taskforce's Tom Forrest

<html><body>
EXPERT OBSERVATION
Urban Taskforce today welcomed the completion of the NSW Productivity Commission’s final Report into Infrastructure Contributions and calls upon the Government to implement the recommendation as a matter urgency to drive economic activity and support our recovery from COVID-19.
The Productivity Commission has undertaken a comprehensive review over the past ten months. The report goes a long way to curb the poor practices which have evolved through the morass which is the NSW Planning System – and no time should be wasted before its recommendations are implemented. Government Departments and agencies have been extensively involved in the development of this Report. It’s time to get on with it.
Key outcomes in the report are: 
<ul>
<li>removing the disincentive for councils to accept development and growth by allowing for the local government rate peg to reflect population growth </li>
<li>ensuring charges can be properly factored into feasibility studies by requiring contributions plans be developed prior to rezoning ▪ introducing a direct land contribution obligation for landowners following rezoning to provide early and adequate funding for land</li>
<li>managing costs and complexity of section 7.11 local contributions plans by using benchmark costs and focusing the role of the Independent Pricing and Regulatory Tribunal in reviewing plans</li>
<li>removing barriers to construction and improving project feasibility by deferring payment of local contributions to the occupation certificate stage</li>
<li>providing a simpler option for councils by increasing the maximum rate of section 7.12 fixed development consent levies to 3% in certain circumstances ▪ limiting the use of state and local planning agreements to direct delivery of works and supporting infrastructure for ‘out-of-sequence’ developments</li>
<li>addressing insufficient and ad hoc section 7.24 special infrastructure contributions (State Government infrastructure levies) through implementation of modest and simple broad-based regional charges</li>
<li>ensuring the beneficiaries of major transport investments contribute to the cost by implementing an additional state contribution for rezoned properties within station service catchments </li>
<li>taking pressure off household water bills by transitioning to cost reflective charges for water connections </li>
<li>making the system easier to navigate and comply with by providing and maintaining clear and rationalised guidance and comprehensive digital tools </li>
<li>being more transparent in reporting on how much money is collected and where it is spent.</li>
</ul>
The Report calls for the practice of “value capture” to be curtailed. Instead, planning agreements should be limited to the recovery of development costs that are over and above those that were anticipated to occur without the development taking place.
The practice of Councils seeking to tax new development to fund historical shortfalls in infrastructure investment must stop. To assist with this, the Report recommends that Council rates will now be linked to population growth in the first major change to the rate pegging system in decades.
Both Councils and the State Government will be required to be open and transparent on contributions they have collected and expenditure made. This should see an end to Council’s stashing infrastructure contributions into a safe and letting developers cop the blame for the lack of public amenity.
Importantly, the Report also acknowledges that affordable housing levies do not fit into a principles-based infrastructure contributions framework (see page 82). The Report clearly states that “the creation of a small quantity of “affordable housing”, may be at the cost of making other housing more expensive”. Taxing new home buyers to fund broad social goals is not efficient or fair. Government should fund affordable housing, or approve more housing thus driving prices down.
Councils will be encouraged to take advantage of the historic low interest rates and borrow to fund infrastructure rather than taking the lazy option of hitting new home-owners for the full cost of new, often unrelated infrastructure. Funding for bio-diversity will also be separately collected and funding for public open space will be required to have a direct nexus to the development.
Tom Forrest is the CEO at Urban Taskforce
</body></html>

j.ballantyne1990-6AQqhLzZaK

NSW report into infrastructure funding released, time for action: Tom Forrest

<html><body>
EXPERT OBSERVER
The conflict within the NSW Coalition over the “Koala Environmental Planning Policy” may be just what the Berejiklian Government needs to adjust their policy settings and focus clearly on delivering a Post COVID-19 recovery.
Since becoming Planning Minister for the second time in March 2019, Rob Stokes, has talked the talk on planning reform and speeding up the system, but he is yet to deliver anything substantial. This new Koala Planning Policy is one of the first SEPPs he has delivered.  It was done with good intent – but like so many of his policies, the consultation was undertaken with blinkers on. 
The Koala SEPP was well motivated when it was made in late 2019 at the height of the tragic bushfires.  But the unintended consequences, the economic consequences, the devil in the detail, have all come back to bite.
Just as increased prescriptive regulation reduces feasibility and therefore housing supply – there are always unintended consequences of planning regulation. The National Party are making that abundantly clear today.
The NSW Productivity Commissioner (an independent arm of the Treasury) has been asked to examine the impact of planning on the economy in NSW and he has already delivered a damming assessment through the publication of his Green Paper.  But rather than learn from this assessment, planning in Sydney seems to be taking a “nanny-state” approach to housing.  Costs are being pushed up by even greater regulation. 
The Government talks about its desire to improve housing affordability, yet it drives prices up by constraining supply through the slowest planning system in the nation which is delivering lower and lower levels of new housing approvals.
The anti-development mantra was politically fashionable in the lead-up to the 2011 election when the public were rightly sick and tired of the lack of transport and social infrastructure to support population growth.  But we have seen investment in those areas and the economy is everything now.
The Premier is cautious about development and this reflects the views of her North Shore base.  But the last decade has seen a consistent under supply of housing when compared to population growth.  This has driven up housing prices.  There were only two years out of the last 15 when new housing matched the demand from population growth.  
Ironically the Koala SEPP, which the NSW Nationals are so upset about, is an example of the powers available to the Minister for Planning, to make SEPPs, should he wish to use them to stimulate the economy.
The is no-one in the NSW Opposition standing up for jobs and private sector investment – so the Government needs to have a fight with itself to correct policy settings which have drifted away from the primacy of the economic imperative. 
If this political stoush helps shift the NSW Cabinet’s mind-set towards a pragmatic approach which is focussed on economic growth, jobs growth, growth in housing supply and growth in new work-places – then that will be a stoush well worth having.
Tom Forrest is the CEO of Urban Taskforce. 
</body></html>

jrobinson-rf4aSBido9

Koala stoush highlights planning policy with seriously unintended consequences

<html><body><div class="page" title="Page 1">
<div class="layoutArea">
<div class="column">
EXPERT OBSERVER 
Urban Taskforce has welcomed the announcement by the NSW Minister for Planning, Hon Rob Stokes, of plans to progress the renewal and redevelopment of the Pyrmont Peninsula.
This is a welcome move forward after a poison combination of politics and bureaucratic in-fighting stymied development of this critical location last year with the IPC determining that the Star Casio / Ritz Carlton Hotel development was not supported by Strategic plans for the precinct late last year.
It is fantastic to see that the NSW Government has acknowledged the critical role that Pyrmont plays in the future of Sydney as a global city.
The release of ‘Directions for the Pyrmont Peninsula Place Strategy’ by the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment is a good start as it promotes the renewal and redevelopment of Pyrmont and its surrounds. 
The new “strategy” establishes the strategic framework for high rise development in Pyrmont and the logical extension of the CBD along the Pyrmont peninsular.
This change has come about following a comprehensive review of the Independent Planning Commission, the public intervention by the Treasurer and a review of the precinct by the GSC. 
The Department of Planning’s submission on the Star proposal as sent to the Independent Planning Commission last year was anti-jobs and anti-growth. This is exactly the opposite to what is needed given the recession we now face.
Urban Taskforce is pleased to see that the Minister for Planning has taken hold of this matter and established a plan for the development of this important precinct.
A change of mind-set is needed across the planning system.
All those involved in the planning system need to stop and re-set. We must continue to deliver improved amenity for residents, improved environmental outcomes and improved architectural built form. But the interests of local NIMBY groups must now to be considered against the greater need for economic growth, increased housing supply, jobs and employment. 
Now is the time to shift the focus away from Strategic Planning and for Minister Stokes to use the powers he has a the Minister for Planning to drive through a COVID Recovery State Environmental Planning Policy (SEPP) which suspends the need to conform with Local Strategic Plans and facilitates approvals as a matter of priority. Jobs and investment are what is needed. This is in the hands of the NSW Government.
The GSC, having completed its Strategic Planning mandate, should now focus all its efforts on supporting the Department in calling in projects and fast-tracking them for approvals.
With all the legislative powers at his hands, Minister can make a new SEPP any time (based on a location, a precinct, power to suspend the need for concurrences or the need for lengthy exhibition processes. Minister, this is the time to use those powers. 
While most Councils are flat-out setting up working from home arrangements and managing public health, rubbish collection and general order, this is the time for the NSW Government to step in and drive our economy forward so we are ready to go as soon as the current health crisis abates.
Tom Forrest is the CEO of Urban Taskforce. 
</div>
</div>
</div></body></html>

Urban Taskforce welcomes release of Pyrmont plan: Tom Forrest 

<html><body>
EXPERT OBSERVATION
The <a href="https://www.urban.com.au/news/115852-land-tax-discount-announced-by-nsw-government" target="_blank">new approach to build-to-rent</a>, announced by Treasurer Dominic Perrottet and Planning Minister Rob Stokes, will deliver increased investment into purpose built rental housing and drive prices down. 
The number 1 reason why property prices in Sydney are so high is the of a lack of supply.  This applies to the rental market as well as the sales market for houses and apartments. Today’s announcement will result in greater investment and more supply.
The Urban Taskforce has been at the forefront of calling for taxation concessions to encourage more investment into Build to Rent.  Today’s announcement does just that and is very welcome news for renters and for jobs.
Urban Taskforce has been calling for the NSW Government to scrap the foreign investor surcharges on residential developments, saying that these taxes are punitive and act to prevent investment in a market that is desperately in need of stimulus and funding.
Today’s announcement demonstrates that on tax matters, the NSW Government has been listening. Foreign investor surcharges will be exempt for the ‘build-to-rent’ market provided construction begins after July 1 this year.
Urban Taskforce calls on all political parties to pass this legislation through the Parliament as soon as possible, in the interests of investment, jobs and lower prices for renters across NSW.
‘Build-to-rent’ means that the entire building is owned by one entity.  It is not split into individual units and sold to buyers through a strata plan. 
The building is designed from the start to the owned and managed for the life of that structure as be available for rental accommodation. 
This is attractive for institutional investors including superannuation funds and is a form of investment in housing that is widely used in England and in North America. 
It also enables renters to access long term rent al leases and generates a genuine choice for consumers who choose not to buy a home. 
Tom Forrest is the CEO of Urban Taskforce.
</body></html>

Tax cut for Build-to-Rent projects will attract investment: Tom Forrest

<html><body>
Urban Taskforce boss Tom Forrest has welcomed the clear message delivered by the Premier, Gladys Berejiklian MP, which declared construction sites and workplaces to be “exempt” from the list of businesses to be shut down.
<div class="page" title="Page 1">
<div class="layoutArea">
<div class="column">
“This morning’s media release from Premier Berejiklian clearly states that construction sites and workplaces are exempt from the close down”, Forrest said. 
“This announcement is welcome and is a great relief to our members, their employees and families. 
“Every precaution will be taken to keep all employees and staff safe. Clear communication will continue to be the key. The Urban Taskforce welcomes this decision and welcomes the clarity of the message.
Forrest had previously said that the <a href="https://www.urban.com.au/expert-insights/111796-there-needs-to-be-clear-messaging-for-all-sectors-if-there-is-to-be-a-close-down?utm_source=Property+Observer+List&amp;utm_campaign=739ec01b88-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2017_09_28_COPY_01&amp;utm_medium=email&amp;utm_term=0_a523fbfccb-739ec01b88-245386345" target="_blank">messages conveyed by the government weren't clear.</a> 
“If the message from the health authorities and the government changes, then the industry will (of course) follow that advice", Forrest said.
“Construction is a massive component of the NSW economy employing hundreds of thousands of workers, trades, architects, planners, engineers, transport workers and traffic controllers, as well as all the associated staff. The industry is well practiced and well placed to identify health and safety risks and take steps to mitigate or eliminate those risks. 
“The building and construction industry will be a critical player in driving the economy through this crisis. We will be even more significant in the recovery from COVID 19. We are keen to work with the Government on planning reforms to free up investment dollars and ensure the recovery is strong”. 
</div>
</div>
</div>
</body></html>

Gladys Berejiklian's clear message on construction sites and workplaces exemption welcomed by Urban Taskforce

<html><body>
EXPERT OBSERVER
<div class="page" title="Page 1">
<div class="layoutArea">
<div class="column">
The State and Commonwealth Governments need to be clear in their messages regarding any “closedown” of “non-essential services or businesses”. 
If any closedown is being contemplated, the announcement should not come through leaks. The announcement must be clear and targeted.
The messaging to date has too often been clumsy and ambiguous. 
It is no wonder thousands of people turned up at Bondi Beach on Friday or that thousands of people simply walked off an infected cruise liner last week. 
Bars in the CBD of Sydney near Martin Place and Phillip St were full as late as Friday afternoon. 
If there is to be a close-down of business in NSW, what does this mean for construction workers? What does it mean for those working out-doors or indoors? What does it mean for delivery drivers or manufacturers? What does it mean for those that produce the goods sold in supermarkets or who work in any part of the supply chain?
Does the “shut-down” apply to bars, restaurants, non-grocery retail, cafes, or is it wider? What are the implications for office staff, banks, cleaners, non-news TV and radio?
The NSW Government need to be clear about if businesses should continue to operate remotely or shut down altogether. 
Urban Taskforce members support measures to prevent the spread of COVID 19. But support for the property, construction and development industry is critical to the economy and the hundreds of thousands of jobs involved. 
This starts with clear messages for everyone. 
 Tom Forrest is the <a href="https://www.urbantaskforce.com.au/about-us/urban-taskforce-staff/tom-forrest-2/" target="_blank">CEO of Urban Taskforce</a>.
</div>
</div>
</div>
</body></html>

Urban Taskforce

Editor's Picks

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News

Urban Taskforce

Editor's Picks

Receive the latest news stories to your inbox

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News