Don't jump the gun. Paddington's Victoria Barracks must not be converted for housing
Back then, Defence wanted to sell its priceless historic harbour military sites, partly for new housing. Thanks to John Howard, Bob Carr, the federal parliament, and the community, all the sites were saved. They were never sold nor transferred to the NSW government. A new federal Sydney Harbour Federation Trust took over.
But 30 years later, it's eerily deja vu. Defence is pondering vacating its exceedingly historic Victoria Barracks, although no decision has been made.
Located in Paddington, surrounded by a high convict sandstone wall, the vast 15-hectare 1840s heritage site is so large that it has vistas inside. As big as Hyde Park, it comprises many convict-built sandstone Edwardian buildings. It is a rare intact military village.
The largest building, 740 metres long, is 'reputed to be the longest stone building in the Southern Hemisphere', according to Defence.
The Barracks is Commonwealth Heritage Listed, being 'the finest complex of colonial barracks … in Australia', 'survives as the only substantial barracks … from the early Victorian period', is 'valuable for future archaeological investigation', and 'is one of the most architecturally imposing 19th century military establishments in Australia'. It is in excellent condition. But because it's an active military base, few members of the public have been inside, apparently including some City of Sydney councillors.
Regrettably, City of Sydney council, in a unanimous resolution late last year, and in case Defence moves out, decided that one key priority for the Barracks should be 'affordable housing' and that it needed to develop 'guiding principles'. Intriguingly, the two-page resolution contains a significant error, stating, 'about 30-50 per cent of the site is heritage-protected, but the remaining area could potentially be redeveloped'. This is erroneous – the entire site is heritage-protected.
Three councillors spoke to the resolution. The first – Labor's Zann Maxwell – strongly in favour, said the site 'could unlock transformative opportunities', and would help 'to address the ongoing demand for homes'.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
West Australian
3 hours ago
- West Australian
Michaelia Cash: Anthony Albanese's Palestinian statehood push is a reward for terror
When Anthony Albanese announced that Australia would unilaterally recognise a Palestinian state, he claimed it was a 'practical contribution to peace'. It was nothing of the sort. It was a gift to Hamas, proof of which came just 48 hours later when Mr Albanese was praised by the terrorist group for his decision. When terrorists congratulate your foreign policy, you are doing something very wrong. The endorsement of Sheikh Hassan Yousef, co-founder of the terrorist group Hamas, of Mr Albanese's decision to recognise Palestine as a state should horrify all Australians. That's the same listed terrorist organisation responsible for the massacre of October 7, the kidnapping of hostages, and the ongoing rocket fire into Israel. You do not achieve peace by rewarding terrorists. All Australians should be appalled at the massive propaganda victory Mr Albanese has handed Hamas on a platter. Mr Albanese has been proven to be completely out of his depth on this vital foreign policy matter. He told Australians Hamas would reject his position to recognise a Palestinian state. The decision does not make the world a safer place, expedite the end of the conflict, deliver a two-state solution, see the free flow of aid, support the release of hostages or put an end to the terrorist group Hamas. Mr Albanese's decision is effectively unconditional recognition. It will go ahead in September, no matter what. Recognition before the hostages are freed, before Hamas is defeated, and before any security guarantees are in place is not diplomacy. It is dangerous naivety. It hands Hamas one of the strategic objectives they sought when they unleashed their campaign of terror in 2023. Recognition should come at the end of a genuine peace process, not at its beginning. It should be the culmination of negotiations in which both sides make real compromises, leading to a secure Israel and a secure Palestine living side by side. That was the bipartisan consensus in this country for decades. By breaking from that cautious, measured approach, Mr Albanese has abandoned the position that recognition must be conditional on the renunciation of terrorism, the release of hostages, and the recognition of Israel's right to exist. If recognition is to mean anything, it must be tied to clear, enforceable conditions. Mr Albanese himself has said these include: no role for Hamas in a future Palestinian state; full demilitarisation; recognition of Israel's right to exist in peace and security; free and fair elections; governance reform, financial transparency, and education oversight to prevent incitement to violence. But here's the problem: none of these conditions have been met. And worse still, Mr Albanese has given no timetable for when they must be. How will these conditions be enforced? What proof will be required? And if they are broken, will recognition be revoked, or will Labor simply turn a blind eye? These are basic questions any serious government would answer before making a major foreign policy decision. Mr Albanese has answered none of them. In truth, the Palestinian Authority, which Mr Albanese claims can deliver these guarantees, has a poor record of honouring its commitments. It has failed to comply with the Oslo Accords, continues to make payments to convicted terrorists and their families, and has not held proper elections in nearly 20 years. Worse, just last year, the Palestinian Authority signed the 2024 Beijing Declaration with Hamas, agreeing to form an interim unity government that would include Hamas, the very terrorists Labor now says will have 'no role' in a Palestinian state. Polling from the Palestinian Centre for Policy and Survey Research — based in Ramallah — shows about 40 per cent of Palestinians currently support Hamas. In Gaza, almost half still back them to govern. Recognising a Palestinian state now risks legitimising a terrorist organisation with significant public support, entrenching their power rather than isolating them. The US has been clear: it does not support unilateral recognition. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has said that similar recognition by France actually caused talks with Hamas to collapse. Mr Albanese should also answer a simple question: what state is he recognising? A state with no agreed borders? No single government in control of its territory? No demonstrated capacity to live in peace with its neighbours? Australians want the war in Gaza to end. So do I. But that will not happen because of a symbolic gesture from Canberra. It will happen only when the conditions for peace are in place — and that means removing Hamas from the equation entirely. Until then, recognition is not just premature. It is reckless. And the Albanese Government's decision will be remembered as a political gesture that rewarded terror, weakened our alliances, and made lasting peace harder to achieve.
AU Financial Review
3 hours ago
- AU Financial Review
Government to freeze housing code as part of red tape blitz
Housing Minister Clare O'Neil has reaffirmed the government's intention to prohibit further adjustments to the National Construction Code to reduce compliance costs and building delays, as the government swings the focus of next week's economic summit away from tax towards red tape reduction and deregulation. O'Neil, who a week ago told The Australian Financial Review the code freeze was in play, despite Labor attacking the opposition for taking such a policy to the last election, said on Thursday her consultation with industry had driven a change in thinking.
Sky News AU
3 hours ago
- Sky News AU
Victorian gender curriculum update ‘shocks' parents as premier defends program
Sky News host Sharri Markson discusses the 'shocking' Victorian curriculum report teaching children as young as five on how body parts may not match their gender. 'A report that would have shocked many parents today, and even more shocking was the Victorian Premier Jacinta Allan's response to it,' Ms Markson. 'The Victorian curriculum has been updated to teach children as young as five that their body parts may not match their gender.'
