monograph no. 3 the local impacts of the sydney 2000 olympic

First published in 2001 by the Centre for Olympic Studies, The Universityof New South Wales, Sydney 2052

© The author and the Centre for Olympic Studies, UNSW

This book is copyright Apart from any fair dealing for the purposes ofprivate study, research, criticism or review, as permitted under theCopyright Act, no part may be reproduced by any process withoutwritten permission from the publishers.

MONOGRAPH SERIES

1. John Black, ed., Coping with Olympic Traffic: Mosman Council SpecialEvent Transport (September 2000)

2. Genevieve Cashman and Richard Cashman, eds, Red, Black and Gold:Sydney Aboriginal People and the Olympics (September 2000)

ISBN: 0 7334 1834 1

Design & Print: UNSW Publishing & Printing Services Ref.

MONOGRAPH NO. 3

THE LOCAL IMPACTS OF THE

SYDNEY 2000 OLYMPIC GAMES:

PROCESSES AND POLITICS OF VENUE PREPARATION

Kristy Ann Owen

Published by the Centre for Olympic Studies and the School of GeographyThe University of New South Wales

2001

MONOGRAPH NO. 3

THE LOCAL IMPACTS OF THE

SYDNEY 2000 OLYMPIC GAMES:

PROCESSES AND POLITICS OF VENUE PREPARATION

Kristy Ann Owen

Published by the Centre for Olympic Studies and the School of GeographyThe University of New South Wales

2001

FOREWARD

The Centre for Olympic Studies is pleased to join with the School of Geography to publisha revised version of an outstanding Honours thesis by Kristy Ann Owen who achieved FirstClass Honours and the University Medal. The Centre previously assisted with the publicationof another First Class Honours thesis by Michelle Hanna from the College of Fine Arts at TheUniversity of New South Wales. Hanna’s book, Reconciliation in Olympism: IndigenousCulture in the Sydney Olympiad was published by Walla Walla Press in 1999 in conjunctionwith the Centre for Olympic Studies.

In this monograph Kristy Ann Owen explores the local impacts of the Sydney OlympicGames on three separate and differing local government areas: Waverley, the site the ofbeach volleyball; Ryde, the venue of some preliminary water polo matches and Auburn,which includes Sydney Olympic Park within its boundaries. She explores issues such ascommunity consultation in the planning of the Olympic Games and legacy. She alsoconsiders whether there were any opportunities for community empowerment in theorganisation of hallmark events. This monograph will be of interest to Olympic scholarsand the organisers of future hallmark events. This volume will also appeal to those whoare concerned with the size and scale of contemporary Games with its encouragement offast-track developments that inevitably result in some decline in established planningprocedures and community consultation.

Richard CashmanDirectorCentre for Olympic StudiesThe University of New South Wales

Page 2 The Centre for Olympic Studies – Monograph Series (3)

The Centre for Olympic Studies – Monograph Series (3) Page 3

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONSAOC

AUBC

BOW

BVB

DA

DLEP

DLLA

DSEE

DUAP

EP&A Act

FOI

HBDC

HMC

IDA

LEP

LCA

NDT

NSW

OCA

ORTA

RALC

RBA

RCC

RPAG

RSC

SEE

SEPP

SMH

SOBC

SOBL

SOCOG

SOP

SOWPV

SPOC

UA&P

WAVC

Australian Olympic Committee

Auburn Council

Bondi Olympic Watch

The Olympic Beach Volleyball event

Development Application

Draft Local Environmental Plan

David Lloyd Leisure Australia Pty Ltd

Draft Statement of Environmental Effects

Department of Urban Affairs and Planning

Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 (NSW)

Freedom of Information

Homebush Bay Development Corporation

Homebush Bay Ministerial Corporation

Integrated Development Assessment

Local Environmental Plan

Local Government Area

The Northern District Times

New South Wales

Olympic Co-ordination Authority

Olympic Roads and Traffic Authority

Ryde Aquatic Leisure Centre

Reserve Bank of Australia

Ryde City Council

Ryde Pool Action Group

Ryde Swimming Centre

Statement of Environmental Effects

State Environmental Planning Policy

The Sydney Morning Herald

Sydney Olympic Bid Committee

Sydney Olympics Bid Limited

Sydney Organising Committee for the Olympic Games

Sydney Olympic Park, Homebush Bay

Second Olympic Water Polo Venue

Sydney Paralympic Organising Committee

Urban Affairs and Planning

Waverley Council


CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION1.1 INTRODUCTION

In the late twentieth century, urban politics and systems of governance around the world have undergoneconsiderable change. The emergence of a more global capitalist economy appears to have contributedto a transition from a managerial approach to urban politics, to what is described as an entrepreneurialapproach. Entrepreneurial governance is evident in policies that focus primarily upon fostering andencouraging local growth and economic development. The managerial concerns of social welfare andthe democratic concerns of public participation and accountability in planning are marginalised inentrepreneurial attempts to improve economic efficiency and attract new investment. The emergenceof entrepreneurial governance and changes in the nature of urban planning and development areevident both in the physical operation and outcomes of policies as well as in the rhetoric or discourse ofthe key actors in urban politics.

The Sydney 2000 Olympic Games was one of the largest hallmark events ever conducted and was alsothe most successful Games of the modern Olympiad. Outstanding performances by athletes, widespreadinvolvement by volunteers and an incredible amount of goodwill were all features of Sydney’s Games.Without doubt, the Games had tremendous impacts on many facets of the lives of many Sydneysiders.These impacts will be spread over a time period much greater than the seventeen days of sport,competition and spectacle that occurred in September 2000, and will have long-term economic, political,social and cultural dimensions. The local impacts of the Sydney Olympic Games were a principal focusof this study, which was undertaken prior to the Games being successfully staged. The generally positiveassessment of the Sydney Olympics should not however be permitted to overshadow some of the morenegative aspects of the legacies of the planning of the Games.

This study also aimed to examine the nature of urban governance in Sydney, as it was manifest in theplanning of the Sydney 2000 Olympics. This examination was possible as the planning processes andimpacts of hallmark events are analogous to those of globalisation and entrepreneurialism incontemporary urban governance (Dunn and McGuirk 1999; Waitt, 1999). Of particular interest to thisstudy were the diverse responses of local governments to the transition to entrepreneurialism and therole of local communities in the new systems of urban governance.

1.2 AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

The academic literature on entrepreneurial governance and the impacts of hallmark events has beendominated by studies in the United States and the United Kingdom. This study adds to this literature byexamining the operation and impacts of these phenomena in Australia. The study objectives wereaddressed through the investigation of three Local Government Areas (LGAs), Ryde, Waverley and Auburn,all of which hosted competition or training venues for the Sydney Olympic Games. Some of thesevenues were also used for the Sydney 2000 Paralympic Games. However, this study focuses on theplanning processes and politics of the 2000 Olympic Games. Specifically the aims of the study were:

Aim 1: Determine the local impacts of hosting hallmark events, such as the Olympics, on localcommunities.

Hall asserted that the numerous impacts of entrepreneurialism and hallmark events on local communitiesare inadequately assessed by the extensive literature on contemporary urban governance (1998: 103). Aprincipal aim of this study was thus to thoroughly investigate the impacts of the Sydney Olympics on thethree selected LCAs. There were three dimensions to this aim:

(a) Determining the physical and economic legacies of the Games, for example, the new facilitiesthat were constructed.


(b) Studies in a number of countries have found that only limited and superficial communityconsultation tends to occur in the planning of hallmark events (Cochrane, Peck and Tickell, 1996;French and Disher, 1997). Investigation of the extent and value of community participation inplanning the Olympic venues was thus undertaken. This also allowed a more general examinationof the perceived importance of community consultation in contemporary urban governance andthe effect that changes in planning practices have on social capital.

(c) The impacts of the Olympics on community ownership and control of local resources andfacilities were examined. Of relevance here was the extent to which privatisation and changes infunding sources remove control or ownership of resources and facilities from the public domain.The consequences of these impacts for community access to public land and facilities were alsoinvestigated.

Aim 2: Examine the nature of hallmark event planning in Australia.

(a) Examine the encapsulation and manifestation of entrepreneurialism in hallmarkevent planning.

The pursuit of hallmark events is an important strategy utilised by entrepreneurial government to promoteeconomic growth, secure global investment, and generate social cohesion (Ley and Olds, 1992; Waittand Furrier, 1999). However, the planning and pursuit of hallmark events also epitomises the characteristicsof entrepreneurialism (Cochrane et al., 1996; Dunn; 1998; Waitt, 1999). This study examined themanifestation of entrepreneurialism in the planning of the Sydney 2000 Games in general, and withspecific reference to the three case studies. Characteristics of entrepreneurialism that were addressedincluded: increased centralisation of planning powers; increased privatisation of government operations;the relaxation of normal planning requirements; reduced or tokenistic community consultation; subversionof democratic principles; and reduced public accountability.

(b) Investigate aspects of hallmark events, which are distinguishable fromentrepreneurial policies, and their influence on planning practices.

Although hallmark events appear in general to encapsulate the principles of entrepreneurial policies,two aspects unique to hallmark events were investigated in this study for their influence on planningpractices. Firstly, hallmark events are subject to strict development deadlines. It has been suggested thatthese deadlines hinder resistance to development, which is normally possible through the delay ofapprovals (Imrie and Thomas, 1995: 486), and that they engender limited public involvement (Dunnand McGuirk, 1999: 27). The role and influence of deadlines, in particular the opening of the SydneyOlympics, on planning practices was therefore investigated.

Secondly, considerable amounts of capital are invested in hallmark events, and budget extensions arecommon. This is a particularly distinguishing feature of hallmark events given that entrepreneurialism isprimarily concerned with economic efficiency. It is hypothesised that the seemingly limitless availabilityof capital can be utilised to manufacture consent and satisfaction amongst communities that are impactedby hallmark events. This study examined whether the prevalence of capital impacted on the legacy andmeaning of the Olympic Games for local communities.

Aim 3: Examine variations in the geography of entrepreneurialism in Australia, as these aremanifest in the planning of the Olympic Games.

A topic which has been inadequately assessed in the academic literature on entrepreneurialism andhallmark events is the variation in entrepreneurial policies between cities or localities (Hall, 1998: 103).Further, it has been questioned whether the extent of entrepreneurialism in contemporary urbangovernance has been exaggerated (Hall and Hubbard, 1996: 155; Murphy and Wu, 1999). The natureand extent of entrepreneurialism in Australian urban governance was therefore examined at two levels:


(a) Variations between localities.

Variations in governance at the local level have been inadequately examined in research on urbanentrepreneurialism. This study contributes to this literature through the three in-depth case studies ofLCAs in Sydney, in relation to which the putative hegemony of entrepreneurialism is examined.

(b) Variations between levels of government.

Variations in the nature and extent of entrepreneurialism between different levels of government werealso examined through the case studies of local governments and the examination of state governmentpolicies, specifically in relation to the planning of the Olympic Games. Questions which were addressedincluded: which levels of government are implicated in shifts towards urban entrepreneurialism; whetherchanges at the local government level are occurring to the same extent as those at central governmentlevel; and whether entrepreneurial practices exhibited by local governments were the result of pressurefrom central government as opposed to the result of an expanding entrepreneurial culture within localgovernment.

Aim 4: Determine the institutional legacy of the Olympic Games in Australia.

A number of researchers have suggested that hallmark events act as catalysts for administrative change,legitimising or justifying more entrepreneurialist governance. Cochrane et al. (1996: 1324), for example,found that Manchester’s bid for the 2000 Olympics initiated a fundamental shift in local politics towardsentrepreneurialism. The three case studies in the research presented here were used to speculate uponwhether any long-lasting bureaucratic changes would be catalysed by the planning and administrationof the Sydney Olympics. The legacy of any such changes for planning frameworks, and the role of thecommunity in defining the extent of any change has also been explored.

1.3 THE SYDNEY 2000 GAMES

On 23 September 1993, Sydney was awarded the right to host the Games of the XXVII Olympiad. Thebid for the year 2000 Olympic and Paralympic Games was prepared by the private company, SydneyOlympics Bid Limited (SOBL), with the support of the New South Wales (NSW) Government on behalfof the people of NSW (Olympic Co-ordination Authority (OCA), 1998a: 1). The NSW Government madethree primary commitments in the staging of the Games (OCA, 1998a):

• to provide the venues and facilities;

• to provide the key support services such as health, security and transport; and

• to underwrite the costs of staging the Olympic Games.

The financial and political commitment of the NSW Government to the Olympics and Paralympics wasenormous. For example, two-thirds of the construction cost of Olympic venues and related facilities,around $3.5 billion, was funded by the public sector (Reserve Bank of Australia (RBA), 1999: 26). Inreturn, it was claimed that the people of NSW would receive a significant legacy, with benefits includingworld-class sporting facilities, environmental improvements, pride in showcasing Sydney to the world,and additional economic benefits. For example, around 24,000 construction jobs were associated withOlympics-related activities over the four years to 1999/2000, and tourism revenue is expected to increaseby around $700 million per annum between 1999 and 2002 due to the Olympics (RBA, 1999: 27). Howthese will transfer into direct economic benefits for all citizens is largely unknown and may be sociallyuneven.

The Olympic Games were held between 15 September and 1 October 2000, and the Paralympic Gameswere held between 18 and 29 October 2000. Official competition and training venues were locatedthroughout Sydney, ensuring that both the spectacle of the Olympics and its legacies were experiencedby many Sydney residents. The residents of Melbourne, Canberra, Adelaide and Brisbane


also directly experienced the Olympics as those cities hosted Olympic soccer competition and trainingvenues.

1.3.1 Olympic organising authorities

Four key agencies were responsible for staging the Sydney Olympic and Paralympic Games: the OlympicCo-ordination Authority (OCA), the Sydney Organising Committee for the Olympic Games (SOCOG), theSydney Paralympic Organising Committee (SPOC) and the Olympic Roads and Transport Authority (ORTA).SOCOG was a Statutory Authority underwritten by the NSW Government and was responsible for theorganisation, management and staging of the Games. The OCA was also a Statutory Authority of theNSW Government, responsible to the Minister for the Olympics. Its functions included the planning for,and provision of, the 2000 Olympic and Paralympic Games venues and facilities (OCA, 1998a: 3). Thedevelopment of Olympic and Olympic-related projects in NSW was governed by specific statutory planningprocedures, including many introduced by new legislative instruments. The principal items of legislationand State policies were: the Olympic Co-ordination Authority Act 1995; the Sydney Organising Committeefor the Olympic Games Ad 1993; the State Environmental Planning Policy No. 38 - Olympic Games andRelated Projects (SEPP 38); and the Sydney Regional Environmental Plan No. 24 - Homebush Bay Area(REP 24). Changes effected by the special Olympics legislation to normal planning processes and theimpacts on local governments and communities are outlined in Chapters 4 and 5.

1.4 MONOGRAPH OUTLINE

Following this introductory chapter outlining the aims of the study, Chapter 2 reviews the literaturerelating to urban entrepreneurialism and hallmark events. The principal characteristics ofentrepreneurialism and their impacts on urban planning processes are extensively discussed. Theseinclude government restructuring, the acceptance by the public sector of the capital risk of entrepreneurialprojects, changes to normal planning processes, reduced public accountability and responsiveness, andlimited community consultation. The discussion of hallmark events focuses on the special planningagencies typically established to co-ordinate and plan such events, and on the positive and negativelegacies of the events. Chapter 2 also highlights some areas which have been inadequately assessed inthe existing literature, for example, the local impacts of hallmark events and spatial variations inentrepreneurial policies.

Chapter 3 outlines and justifies the two principal methods used in this research. Firstly, eleven in-depth,semi-structured interviews of a purposive sample of informants were conducted and analysed. Secondly,almost two hundred documents relating to key actors and events were collected and analysed tosupplement and substantiate the interview data. These methods proved to be effective in achieving theaims of the study.

Chapters 4, 5 and 6 present the results of the research, in conjunction with a discussion and interpretationof their meaning. Chapter 4 discusses in detail the legacy and impacts of the Sydney 2000 Olympics forthe Ryde, Waverley and Auburn LGAs. The political and social legacies will be particularly addressed.Chapter 5 examines the analogies between the planning for hallmark events and entrepreneurial urbangovernance. Instances of the entrepreneurial characteristics of government restructuring and the relaxationof planning processes in the planning of the Sydney Games are discussed. Chapter 6 then examines thespatial variation in entrepreneurial policies, particularly noting instances where the ascendancy of urbanentrepreneurialism has been challenged. The role of local governments and communities in contemporaryurban governance is discussed. Chapter 7 concludes the monograph with a summary of the pertinentissues and findings.


CHAPTER 2: THE URBAN GEOGRAPHY OFENTREPRENEURIALISM AND HALLMARK EVENTSThe study of urban governance and politics has always been a dominant theme of urban geography, atrend which has strongly continued in recent decades with a considerable body of literature on thesubject of the emergence of entrepreneurial urban governance and the physical, institutional and symbolicrestructuring of place with which this is associated (Hall and Hubbard, 1996: 154; McGuirk, Winchesterand Dunn, 1996). Traditionally, urban governments were viewed as demonstrating a ‘managerial’ approachto urban politics, with policies focussed on the provision of welfare and municipal services (Harvey,1989: 4). The late twentieth century has however been characterised by a ‘new urban politics’ (Cox,1993), in which entrepreneurial governments implement policies which aim to foster and encouragelocal growth and economic development, and are less concerned with managerialist priorities (Hall andHubbard, 1996: 154; Hall and Hubbard, 1998: 2; Leitner and Garner, 1993: 60). Explanations of thistransition from managerialism typically emerge from the complementary discourses of globalisationand entrepreneurialism, both of which are held to be outcomes of an ascendant neo-liberal politicalideology (Dunn and McGuirk, 1999: 20; McGuirk Winchester and Dunn, 1998: 128). The first twosections of this chapter discuss the factors which have catalysed the transition toward urbanentrepreneurialism and the characteristics of entrepreneurial governance. The third section examinesthe characteristics and impacts of hallmark events, which appear to be analogous to many of thecharacteristics of entrepreneurial governance. Finally, a brief outline of issues which have beeninadequately addressed in the literature on entrepreneurialism and hallmark events is provided.

2.1 GLOBALISATION

Since the 1970s, world-wide changes in the nature, scale and organisation of production have occurredand a hegemonic global capitalist economy has emerged (McGuirk et al. 1998: 110). The phenomenonof globalisation has been facilitated and characterised by improvements in information andcommunications technology; transportation advances; changes to financial systems, corporate structuresand international trade systems; and the accelerated mobility of investment (Dunn and McGuirk, 1999:19; Hall and Hubbard, 1996: 159). Recent economic decline and deindustrialisation, the global changesin production and consumption, and the resulting competition between places for flexible capital arefrequently identified as the major factors which have catalysed central government restructuring andthe transition to entrepreneurialism (Cochrane et al., 1996: 1332; Hall and Hubbard, 1996: 159; Harvey,1989; Leitner and Garner, 1993: 73). Although some authors question this postulated causal relationshipbetween globalisation and changing forms of governance, it is generally agreed that entrepreneurialismis in some way related to broader shifts in the nature of the capitalist economy (Hall and Hubbard,1996: 160; 1998: 15).

2.2 ENTREPRENEURIALISM

‘Urban entrepreneurialism’ is characterised by the proactive promotion of local economic developmentby urban governments in alliance with other private sector agencies (Hall and Hubbard, 1998: 4). Stateintervention in the operation of market forces is minimised and there is an emphasis on efficiencyabove equity (Pickvance and Preteceille, 1991). Entrepreneurialist states have emerged in numerouswestern countries, and are evident at federal, state and local levels of government (Hall and Hubbard,1996: 157; McGuirk et al., 1998: 108). The nature and success of entrepreneurial regimes in differentcountries, and even in different localities, are however quite diverse and heavily dependent upon localeconomic, social, political and cultural contexts (Hall and Hubbard, 1996: 157; 1998: 20). Nevertheless,a number of features appear regularly in studies of urban entrepreneurialism, and may thus be universallysalient (Harvey, 1989: 7). These include government restructuring, public assumption of risk, and changesto normal planning processes.


2.2.1 Government restructuring

Entrepreneurial regimes typically involve significant restructuring of intra- and inter-governmental relationsin response to changing economic and political circumstances (Harvey, 1989). The centralisation of powerand greater fiscal restraint on behalf of federal and state governments, who are focussed on achievingeconomic growth and competitiveness, characterise government restructuring (Anderson, 1990: 480; lmrieand Raco, 1999: 45). Changes at the local government level have been caused by reductions in funding forlocal councils for local welfare and social services (Phibbs and Cox, 1994: 162), the dominance of therhetoric of entrepreneurialism and globalisation, and the theory that economic growth results in benefit tothe entire community (see Leitner and Gamer, 1993: 64-65; McGuirk et al, 1998: 123). A number of researchershave found, for example, that in response to central government restructuring, local governments haveadopted entrepreneurial strategies in order to attract both central government and extra-local, non-governmental funding (Imrie and Raco, 1999: 47, 49; Leitner and Garner, 1993: 57; Walsh, 1993: 12).

The restructuring of governments that is associated with the transition to entrepreneurialism also typicallyinvolves an increase in the involvement of the private sector in urban planning. Harvey (1989: 7)considered the public-private partnerships created by entrepreneurial governments to be the centrepieceof the new urban politics. New institutions, typically comprised of influential business people, oftenhave statutory powers and are answerable only to central governments (McGuirk et al., 1996: 1818).Exemplifying the ‘new’ partnerships internationally are development corporations, tools of urbanredevelopment which can bypass local authorities and provide the means for incorporating the privatesector directly into decision-making (Charlesworth and Cochrane, 1994: 1729; lmrie and Raco, 1999:50). Australian examples include the Newcastle Honeysuckle Development Corporation (McGuirk et al.,1998: 110, 116), and the Pyrmont-Ultimo development as part of the City West Urban Strategy (Santand Jackson, 1991).

Many authors describe the changes associated with the new urban politics as a shift from governmentto governance, the latter term referring to the wide range of actors (private, voluntary and public sector)involved in managing, regulating and funding the urban area (Cochrane et al., 1996: 1320; lmrie andRaco, 1999: 45; McGuirk et al., 1998: 111). The centralisation of power and involvement of non-electedprivate capital in urban politics has led entrepreneurial governance to be criticised for its reduced publicaccountability and responsiveness, and reduced opportunities for community participation (Cochraneet al., 1996: 1333; lmrie and Thomas, 1995: 480; McGuirk et al., 1998: 120).

Aspects of entrepreneurial governance have been well recognised in Australia and are evident in anumber of policy documents and legislative instruments (see Pusey, 1991; Winter and Brook, 1993).The Federal Government’s 1994 Working Nation White Paper, for example, encouraged regions to marketand plan for their own economic development (McGuirk et al., 1996: 1817). The Environmental Planningand Assessment Act 1979 (NSW) (EP&A Act), which delineates state and local government planningpowers, was extolled, when first enacted, as world’s best practice for clearly recognising the importanceof public participation in planning (Department of Planning, 1991: 6; Murphy and Wu, 1999). However,the recent integrated development assessment (IDA) reforms, introduced through the EnvironmentalPlanning and Assessment Amendment Act 1997 (NSW), have had the effect of centralising and privatisingplanning control of larger developments (Bell, 1998; Department of Urban Affairs and Planning (DUAP),1997: 6). The IDA reforms have thus been criticised for transferring public participation rights out of theoriginal Act (Albany Consulting Group, 1997: 65-67; Dunn and McGuirk 1999: 22). Such changes havethreatened the sincere attempts of many of Sydney’s local governments to expand and improve publicparticipation in local planning (Bell, 1998). It is possible however, that the adverse impacts ofentrepreneurialism on public participation have been exaggerated. Many local communities are likelyto have resisted any depletion of their valued democratic rights regarding planning processes.


2.2.2 Public risk

Entrepreneurial urban policies are often speculative, with the public sector commonly subsidisingredevelopment projects. Taxpayers are then burdened with most of the project’s risk while the privatesector monopolises the potential profit of capital investment (Dunn and McGuirk 1999: 21; Ward,1997: 1501). Harvey (1989: 7) saw the risk-absorption by local or regional, rather than nationalgovernments as a distinguishing feature of modern entrepreneurial politics. Exemplifying this publicburden is the risk that the NSW Government accepted in relation to the Sydney 2000 Games, where theGovernment guaranteed to underwrite the cost of the Games and to indemnify the Australian OlympicCommittee (AOC) against any liability they might incur in connection with the Games (Auditor-General,1999). Another example is the liability of the NSW Government for any loss of revenue to the privatelyowned F2 tollway resulting from the construction of competing public transport systems (Murphy andWu, 1999).

2.2.3 Changes to normal planning processes

A third distinguishing feature of entrepreneurial governance is the changes that are made to normalplanning processes in order to create favourable investment environments that attract private capitalinvestment into local spaces and to fast-track the planning of entrepreneurial developments. Numerousmechanisms and strategies are utilised by governments to alter normal processes and attract investors,including public subsidies and incentives such as refunded development application fees to successfuldevelopers, tax abatements and land purchase subsidies (see Leitner and Garner, 1993: 60). Governmentshave also responded to calls for development processes to be fast-tracked and streamlined, creatingmore ‘flexible’ and ‘efficient’ decision-making processes through the centralisation of decision-makingand the dilution of local planning powers. Planning requirements, such as the preparation ofenvironmental impact statements and the public provision of information, are also often less onerousfor entrepreneurial developments. Special planning agencies, partnerships between the public andprivate sector, are often established for developments of significant status, and special legislation maybe enacted to exempt certain projects from the usual regulatory controls, for example, the DarlingHarbour Authority Act 1984 (Mowbray, 1994: 100; Pain, 1989: 28).

These changes to policy and planning frameworks in entrepreneurial systems of governance have howeverbeen criticised of undermining democratic principles and reducing opportunities for communityconsultation and public participation (Imrie and Raco, 1999: 45; Leitner and Garner, 1993: 61; Robinsonand Shaw, 1991: 63). Community participation that does take place is often tokenistic, occurring late inthe development process, at the stage of implementation rather than the strategic level (Hall andHubbard, 1996: 166; Robinson and Shaw, 1991: 66; Ward, 1997: 1503). The avenues of consultationthat do remain tend to incorporate only a well-educated, middle-class minority, thereby offering littleopportunity for the empowerment of wider sections of the community (McGuirk et al., 1998: 122-123).Such impacts on community participation have also been noted by a number of authors to be the resultof hallmark event or global mega-event planning. These events have been found to suppress andmarginalise dissenting voices by adopting a ‘feel-good discourse’ and minimising opportunities forcommunity participation, often by excluding local government (Cochrane et al., 1996; Dunn and McGuirk1999: 29; Harvey, 1989: 9; Waitt and Furrier, 1999). In the lead-up to the Sydney 2000 Olympics, forexample, green groups who had remarked negatively on environmental aspects of the Games werepublicly accused of damaging both Sydney and Australia’s image (Green Games Watch, 1997: 5).

Place marketing is another strategy used by entrepreneurial governments to promote, often globally,the advantages of particular localities, and thereby to attract investment. Bidding for and hosting hallmarkevents have become key aspects of the local politics of place marketing (Cochrane et al., 1996: 1321).The place marketing aspects of bidding for and winning the Sydney 2000 Olympics and the competitionbetween local areas to host venues are not however within the scope of this study,


which is concerned with the politics and planning of the Olympics after the Sydney Olympic bid wassuccessful.

2.2.4 The value of community consultation

The subversion of community participation is a prominent finding of the literatures on the newentrepreneurial urban politics, and it is pertinent to comment here on the value of community consultation.Local development strategies rely to some degree on grassroots reception for their survival. To ensurethe long-term reliability and success of planning policies, a measured decision, involving effective,empowering community consultation is essential (Hall and Hubbard, 1996: 165; Pain, 1989: 27).Community consultation is also imperative if the democratic principles of openness, accountability andfairness in administration are to be upheld (Dunn and McGuirk, 1999: 23; Robinson, 1993: 329). However,decision-makers often claim that community consultation is time consuming, costly, inefficient anddifficult (Robinson, 1993). There are undoubtedly limits to public involvement, for example, the cost ofconsultation and time constraints for developments. However, effective community consultation, withinan appropriate time frame, is nonetheless essential.

The value of community consultation is evident in its positive impact on ‘social capital’: the norms andnetworks of trust and civic engagement that make it easier to solve problems that affect people incommon. Public participation in policy and regulation, or public faith in the integrity of planninginstruments and processes, is one potential source of social capital (Albany Consulting Group, 1997: 58,59). Social capital is increasingly recognised as a necessary, although not sufficient condition in achievingboth economic and democratic efficiency and success (Albany Consulting Group, 1997: 58; Cochrane etal., 1996: 1327; Putnam, 1994). Entrepreneurialism appears however to seriously jeopardise socialcapital, creating a real possibility of long-lasting public mistrust and dissatisfaction in planning systemsthrough the subversion of community consultation and non-transparent, unaccountable decision-making(Dunn and McGuirk, 1999: 30).

2.2.5 The new urban politics?

Despite the considerable body of literature espousing the emergence of entrepreneurialism, someresearchers have questioned whether the new urban politics are really so different from the old. Halland Hubbard, for example, noted that city governments have always pursued entrepreneurial strategiesand played a crucial role in local economic development (1996: 155; see also Leitner and Garner, 1993:59). Murphy and Wu (1999) have argued the reverse, that the managerial and democratic concerns ofgovernments remain as important as they were in the 1970s, although the growing importance ofentrepreneurialism has increased the complexity of governance and diverted funds from managerialpolicies (see also lmrie and Raco, 1999). It is unchallenged however that some form of change hasoccurred in modes of urban governance, and that traditional relationships between the community,state and capital are being reconstituted (Hall and Hubbard, 1996: 155; lmrie and Raco, 1999: 46;Rydin, 1998: 176). The divergence of views on the extent of change perhaps highlights the salience oflocal differences in economic, social and political conditions. It is likely that the unique characteristics oflocal areas and councils will result in varying degrees of entrepreneurialism, managerialism anddemocratisation in local urban governance.

Entrepreneurial strategies are utilised as a means of stimulating economic growth and encouragingnew investment in local areas. Increasingly however, critical questions are being asked about the degreeto which entrepreneurial strategies have helped alleviate economic and social problems (Leitner andGarner, 1993: 72). Some authors have argued, for example, that entrepreneurialism increases thepolarisation of wealth and socio-economic inequities, and contributes to the disempowerment andcontinued marginalisation of some groups (Boyle, 1997: 1978; Harvey, 1989: 12, 16; Leitner and Garner,1993: 72). Nevertheless, the transition of urban politics from managerialism to entrepreneurialism iswell recognised in many countries around the world, including Australia. Government restructuring,


the assumption of risk by the public sector, and changes to normal planning processes are salientcharacteristics of the new urban governance.

2.3 HALLMARK EVENTS

Hallmark events are increasingly recognised as important tools for urban redevelopment and economicgrowth in entrepreneurial urban politics (Dunn and McGuirk, 1999: 22; Ley and Olds, 1992). The planningprocesses for, and the local impacts of, hallmark events also appear to epitomise many of thecharacteristics of entrepreneurial governance (Waitt, 1999; Dunn, 1998). Hallmark events, alternativelytermed mega-events, spectacles or cultural festivals, include the Commonwealth Games, World’s Fairs,Grand Prixs and the America’s Cup (Boyle, 1997). Of the many forms of spectacle, the Olympic Games,a globalised hallmark event, is the largest global marketing opportunity (Dunn and McGuirk, 1999: 18;Murphy and Wu, 1999). The Olympics thus provide the basis for much of the urban geography literatureon the features and impacts of hallmark events.

2.3.1 Special planning regimes

Special planning agencies are usually established to ensure the efficient organisation of hallmark events.These agencies are often private-sector-led coalitions of local business elites (Cochrane et al., 1996:1322), or crown corporations with statutory authority (McGuirk et al., 1998: 111), analogous to thepublic-private partnerships characteristic of entrepreneurial governance (Hall and Hubbard, 1998). Thespecial planning agencies typically have considerable planning powers, which allow them to expropriateland and override city bylaws, zoning regulations and local planning policies (Ley and Olds, 1992: 185).Although the public sector may retain a role as an important decision-maker in the planning of hallmarkevents, the involvement of the private sector and changes to normal processes in the planning ofhallmark events have resulted in reduced opportunities for public participation, as was evident in theplanning of the 1996 Atlanta Olympics (French and Disher, 1997: 391).

The anti-democratic procedures of agencies responsible for planning hallmark events have led a numberof authors to claim that the events serve to legitimate the interests of private capital (Boyle, 1997: 1976;Ley and Olds, 1992: 180). Further, contrary to the discourse of economic efficiency that supposedlycharacterises entrepreneurial strategies, significant budget increases are common in the planning ofhallmark events. For example, the project deficit of Vancouver’s Expo 86 increased from $12 million in1980 to $311 million at the beginning of 1985 (Ley and Olds, 1992). Such funds can be deployed toensure both a very high standard of infrastructure and possibly to satisfy discontented stakeholders orcommunities.

The special planning agencies and processes implemented for hallmark events are often justified by thestrict deadlines to which hallmark events are subject. These deadlines prevent local authorities fromresisting particular development initiatives of central agencies, prohibiting the delay of approvals ofdevelopment applications and the undertaking of comprehensive community consultation (Imrie andThomas, 1995: 486). Hence, dissent is discouraged and only superficial community consultation transpires(Albany Consulting Group, 1997: 64; Dunn and McGuirk, 1999: 27).

2.3.2 The legacies of hallmark events

Cities hosting hallmark events receive a wide variety of positive and negative legacies from these events,of which three will be discussed here. First, there are the typically world-class facilities and infrastructurethat remain after the event. For Sydney, legacy assets which remain after the 2000 Games include theAthletic and Aquatic Centres and the Olympic Stadium (Auditor-General, 1999: 4). Secondly there arethe economic benefits and costs. The 1992 Barcelona Olympics induced $8.1 billion of investment ininfrastructure and housing (French and Disher, 1997: 379), and employment multipliers and new fundingopportunities from higher levels of government were undoubtedly created (Cochrane et al., 1996:1322; Ley and Olds, 1992: 184). However, there is generally little tangible,


direct economic benefit for most citizens, who instead often carry a public debt, as with the $1 billiondebt after the 1976 Montreal Olympics (French and Disher, 1997: 379). Event organisers often suggestthat such outcomes are surpassed in symbolic terms, with increases in civic pride and goodwill resultingfrom the event (see Ley and Olds, 1992). Thirdly, the competitive nature of bidding processes for hallmarkevents requires a considerable expenditure, if not wastage, of resources (Ward, 1997: 1499). Furthermore,resources are often diverted from welfare programs to hallmark event development projects, thusmagnifying social inequities and intensifying the marginalisation of some community groups (Hall andHubbard, 1996: 167; Ley and Olds, 1992: 178).

Many of the features of hallmark events are analogous to the characteristics of entrepreneurial governance.With reference to the Olympic Games, these resemblances have led Dunn (1998: 31) to conclude thatthe Olympics bidding and hosting process threatens to stifle community input and discourage dissent,just like globalisation and entrepreneurialism. Cochrane et al. have also found that hallmark events canact as catalysts for administrative change, leaving a legacy of entrepreneurial governance (1996: 1324).Hallmark events have however been found to have physical and economic benefits, at least in theshort-term, and to generate social cohesion and civic pride.

2.4 CONCLUSION

The studies on entrepreneurial modes of governance indicate clearly that entrepreneurialism has becomean important ideology in urban governance. Hallmark events are well studied as an importantredevelopment strategy utilised by entrepreneurial governments. It has been noted however that theliterature deals inadequately with the variations in entrepreneurial policies between cities or localities,and with the actual physical, social, economic and environmental impacts of such policies (Hall andHubbard, 1998: 103). Local resistance to the transition to entrepreneurialism has also been inadequatelyaddressed, as has the ability of local communities to use hallmark events to achieve pre-existing goals(Boyle, 1997). This study aimed to address these issues, through an examination of the planning of amajor hallmark event in Sydney, a city that exemplifies the contemporary managerial and entrepreneurialinitiatives and structures of Australian urban governance (Murphy and Wu, 1999).


CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGYThe local impacts of planning for the Sydney 2000 Olympics and the nature of urban governance inAustralia were investigated through three case studies. All three case study sites were competition ortraining venues for the Sydney Olympic or Paralympic Games. These venues were the Ryde Aquatic LeisureCentre (RALC), the Bondi Beach Volleyball Stadium, and the Sydney Olympic Park (SOP) at HomebushBay. The venues are located respectively in the Sydney Metropolitan LCAs of Ryde, Waverley and Auburn(Figure 3.1). A critical examination of the planning processes for hosting the respective Olympic event orevents was undertaken, and the impacts of these processes and events on the community were determined.Discourse analysis of semi-structured interviews and various documents was conducted with theunderstanding that language is both active in and integral to changes in urban governance (Jacobs, J.M.,1999: 13; Rydin, 1998: 177). Interviews enable the researcher to access a diversity of information aboutevents, peoples’ opinions and experiences, with subsequent discourse analysis revealing the underlyingcausal mechanisms and structures behind observed behaviour (Baxter and Eyles, 1997: 505; Dunn, 1999;McDowell, 1992: 213).

Figure 3.1: The location of the local government areas of Ryde, Waverley andAuburn in the Sydney Metropolitan area.

Source: Author.


3.1 IN-DEPTH, SEMI-STRUCTURED INTERVIEWS

Sampling procedure

The principal source of data for this study were semi-structured interviews conducted with a purposivesample of informants. Key players, who were considered valuable to the study due to their influentialrole and level of involvement, were targeted. The informants were selected to ensure that the diverseexperiences of communities, councils and Olympic organising authorities were all represented. Elevenin-depth interviews were conducted, as detailed in Table 3.1. Four interviews were conducted in relationto the RALC, while three were conducted in relation to each of the Bondi Stadium and SOP. The interviewwith the OCA representative covered aspects relating to all three venues.

Table 3.1: Interview informants and roles, as relevant to the research

Interview Role Organisationnumber

1 Project Manager, RALC Ryde City Council

2 Director, Public Ryde City Council

Facilities & Services

3 President Ryde Pool

Member Action Group

4 Public Officer Ryde City Council

5 Spokesperson (until 6/99) Bondi Olympic Watch

6 Mayor Waverley Council

7 General Manager Waverley Council

8 General Manager Auburn Council

9 Director, Environmental Auburn Council

& Technical Services

10 Manager, Olympic Auburn Council

Co-ordination Unit

11 Planner OCA

The interview process

Each interview began with a series of questions on the venue specifically, thereby operationalising the firstaim of the study. These questions addressed the process by which the LGA came to be hosting the Olympicvenue(s), the benefits to be derived from Olympic involvement, and the extent of community consultation.For example, the third question asked in interviews 1 and 2 was: ‘what are the benefits of the Aquatic Centreto the Ryde community and will there be long-term economic benefits?’ Aims 2 and 3 were operationalisedthrough questions addressing the involvement of private developers and the special legislation under whichthe venues were planned. For example, most informants were asked the question: ‘is it appropriate thatplanning for developments for special events, such as the Olympics, should differ from normal planningpractices, with special legislation and exemptions from normal planning requirements?’ (question 9 in interview6). The interviews were concluded with opinion-oriented questions relevant to all study aims. These addressedattitudes towards urban governance and the planning of hallmark events in general. For example, the informantsof interviews 1 and 2 were asked: ‘do you think that changes to State and Federal Government policies haveforced local governments, such as Ryde Council, to become more pro-development?’ (question 16). A genericinterview schedule is presented as Appendix 1.


The confidentiality requirements imposed by Olympic legislation and authorities were respected in thisresearch, although these requirements did adversely affect access to some information as someinformants were subject to confidentiality agreements. Access to potential informants, particularly inthe OCA, was also limited as they were unwilling or not permitted to speak about relevant events.Records of refusals of interview (three from the OCA and one non-reply from Ryde City Council) werekept, as were any comments made by these potential informants. These refusals and commentsthemselves have become valuable data.

3.2 DOCUMENT COLLECTION

The second important source of data, the documents relating to key actors and events at each venue,supplemented and substantiated the data obtained through interviews, as well as providing a moregeneral indication of various organisations’ approaches to urban governance.

The documents varied by type and were collected from many different sources, including: libraries,council archives and correspondence files, Green Games Watch 2000 Inc., council officers, the HomebushBay Information Centre and newspapers. The main documents included information newsletters,development updates, reports of state government departments and Olympic organising authorities,policy and strategic documents, site specific documents (for example, statements of environmentaleffects), correspondence, media reports, and reports of community consultation processes. Transcriptsof radio interviews from the radio station ‘Triple J’, one relating to the RALC, and the other to the BeachVolleyball development, were also data sources. In total, approximately ninety documents and onehundred media reports were reviewed.

Access to documents

Schedule 1 of the Freedom of Information Act 1989 (FOI Act) states that documents are exempt fromrequests for information if they have been prepared by or received by SOCOG, the OCA or ORTA andcontain matter that is confidential to the International Olympic Committee or the AOC. Olympic-relateddocuments are also subject to the standard exemptions from freedom of information (FOI) legislation,exempting documents relating to business affairs or subject to legal professional privilege. In this research,access to some documents was restricted due to these exemptions, although differences in the willingnessof councils and Olympic bodies to provide access to Olympic-related documents were significant. AuburnCouncil (AUBC) allowed virtually unrestricted access to documents in their Olympic files. WaverleyCouncil (WAVC) provided partial access to documents, being quite willing to provide copies of documentsthat were not confidential. Ryde City Council (RCC) however were particularly restrictive. After fourinformal requests and two formal FOI requests, attempts at gaining access to RCC’s Olympic files werediscontinued.

3.3 DISCOURSE ANALYSIS

Discourse analysis provides a robust framework and practical method for conducting research and can bedeployed to address substantive empirical questions in the urban field (Hastings, 1999: 9). The text of thein-depth interviews and documents were analysed using a coding regime that incorporated themes derivedfrom the extensive literature review (see Chapter 2) and which arose through the research process. Thefour main themes in the coding regime were entrepreneurialism, managerialism, hallmark events, andOlympic legacy, thereby addressing Aims 2, 3 and 4 in particular (see Appendix 2).

Quotations from in-depth interviews are cited by interview number (Table 3.1) and the transcript pagenumber. Single quote marks are used to denote quotations from non-taped interviews. Quotationsfrom the transcripts of the radio interviews are cited by the radio station (Triple J), date of interview andtranscript page number. Correspondence, often between Olympic organisations and councils, is alsooften used. The text citation includes the sender, receiver, date and page number.


CHAPTER 4: THE LOCAL IMPACTS OF THE SYDNEY2000 OLYMPIC GAMESWhen the opening of the Sydney 2000 Olympics was less than one year away, the full extent and natureof the local impacts of the Games were unclear. What was certain however was that the impacts werealready diverse and significant, and that they would continue to be so. This chapter describes in detailthe legacy and impacts of the Games for the local government areas of Ryde, Waverley and Auburn,thereby addressing the first aim of this study. The political and social implications of these legacies wereparticularly examined.

4.1 RYDE LOCAL GOVERNMENT AREA

4.1.1 Ryde Aquatic Leisure Centre: The second Olympic water polo venue

Ryde Aquatic Leisure Centre (RALC) was constructed on the site of the former Ryde Swimming Centre,located in Olympic Park, Ryde (Plates 4.1 and 4.2). The site, which has a total area of 5.27 hectares, isapproximately 5 kilometres north-east of Sydney Olympic Park at Homebush Bay, and 10 kilometresnorth-west of the Sydney CBD (JBA + Berkhout Urban Planning Consultants, 1998: 8). Followingacceptance of an invitation from the NSW Government to bid for the provision of the Second OlympicWater Polo Venue (SOWPV), a Ryde City Council (RCC) proposal to use RALC for the SOWPV wasaccepted in March 1998. The venue hosted all preliminary matches of the 2000 Olympic Games waterpolo competition.

Plate 4.1: The RALC site under construction 19/4/99. View from Weaver Street,looking north-west.

Source: Author, 1999, Kodak 100, auto zoom


Plate 4.2: The RALC site under construction 21/9/99. View from Weaver Street,looking north-west.


4.1.2 The process

The Ryde Olympic Park site, including the area where the RALC was constructed, was transferred to RCCby the Cumberland County Council in 1954, on the terms that the land be used only for the purposes ofa public park, public reserve or public recreation areas, and that only buildings required in connection tothose uses be constructed on the land. The Ryde Swimming Centre (RSC) had operated on the sitesince 1961 until its closure and subsequent demolition in June 1998. Olympic Park is currently zoned‘(6)(a) Open Space: Recreation Existing’ under the Ryde Planning Scheme Ordinance, and the land cantherefore only be transferred from Council ownership if the zoning is changed by an environmentalplanning instrument which has been afforded due process.

The redevelopment of the RSC was not directly an outcome of Olympic preparations, but had been arecognised option for RCC since they commissioned a leisure needs survey in 1991. The adoption of aPlan of Management for all sports grounds in 1996 and the results of a Strategic Master Plan Study forRSC in 1997, had led Council to formulate a number of different options for the Olympic Park site,including the complete redevelopment of RSC. In addition to these surveys and studies, a ProjectManagement Team had been established, and community forums and telephone surveys had beenconducted to determine community views on the future of Olympic Park In October 1997, RCC submitteda formal Expression of Interest to the OCA for the right to host the Second Olympic Water Polo Venue(SOWPV). It was not until March 1998 however that RCC was awarded the right to host the SOWPV. Inthe meantime, RCC had advertised and publicly exhibited Draft Local Environmental Plan (DLEP) 90,which aimed to reclassify Olympic Park from ‘community’ to ‘operational’ land, as defined by the LocalGovernment Act 1993 (LG Act). The latter classification offers councils greater flexibility and power inthe use of public land. Most relevantly, section 46 of the LG Act allows councils to grant leases orlicences in respect of public land that is classified operational for periods exceeding 21 years. DLEP 90was gazetted on 26 June 1998, but it was rejected by RCC in mid-1999 as invalid, following communityprotests that the Council’s information on the reclassification was misleading


and that the Public Hearing was conducted by a person with apparent bias. Replacing this Plan however,with the same effect, was Local Environmental Plan (LEP) 98, made on 19 July 1999 by the Minister forUrban Affairs and Planning (UA&P). RCC had also proposed DLEP 94, intended to rezone part of theOlympic Park site to Residential 2(e), to enable the sale of the rezoned land for residential property. Thisproposal was rescinded on 21 July 1998 in response to significant community opposition.

On 18 December 1998, the Minister for UA&P approved the OCA Development Application (DA) for theRALC This DA proposed a development that would be funded by three sources: RCC, the OCA/SOCOG/StateGovernment, and David Lloyd Leisure Australia Pty Ltd (DLLA). Council negotiations for the involvement ofDLLA as an equity partner in this particular project had begun on 9 June 1998, with a broad heads ofagreement struck on 17 July 1998 (Brus, 1998: 6, 17). Construction of the RALC began in late 1998.

4.1.3 The impacts

The redevelopment of the RSC had been planned by RCC since 1991. The old Centre suffered structuraland operational problems, including poor water circulation and filtration, rusting and corroded steelsupporting structures, and concrete cancer (Jordan, 1999). The Olympic Games offered RCC, accordingto their Public Officer, a ‘once in a lifetime opportunity’ (Int. #4: 4) to redevelop the 32year-old RSCwith the expertise of the Olympic designers and ‘at minimum cost to its ratepayers’ (The Sydney MorningHerald (SMH), 21/5/98).

The RALC was proposed as an appropriate response to the changing recreation, leisure and healthneeds of the population of the City of Ryde and it will undoubtedly provide a high quality physical legacyfor the Ryde community (RCC, 1999: 3; JBA + Berkhout Urban Planning Consultants, 1998: iv). TheRALC comprises a multi-purpose centre designed by Peddle Thorp and Walker/Donovan Payne, Architects.The first stage of the project, which was to be completed prior to the Olympics, will include a 50m pooldesigned to FINA (International Swimming Federation) standards for Olympic water polo, a 25m indoorleisure pool complex including a wave pool, a small hydro-therapy pool, and an indoor multi-purposesports hall. Construction of the first stage is the responsibility of the OCA. The second stage envisages ahealth and leisure complex, including another 25m indoor pool, four outdoor tennis courts, a childminding creche, function rooms and a restaurant. Both stages will be operated, except during theOlympic period, by the private operator, DLLA. RCC claimed that, in the RALC, ‘[t]he people of Ryde willhave a legacy, which will provide a lasting memory of the Games, and be a landmark facility for use byall age groups in the City [of Ryde]’ (RCC, 1998: 1, their emphasis). The facility will also provide asignificant legacy for the sport of water polo, although this has raised concerns about the availability ofthe pools for general community use. During water polo competitions, community access to recreationareas will quite possibly be restricted.

Involvement in the Olympics also provided Ryde with a significant economic legacy. The estimate of thetotal cost of the RALC in June 1999 was $24.5 million, with RCC contributing around $16.1 million andOCA/SOCOG contributing $8.465 million. The RCC contribution includes a $2.5 million interest-freeloan from the OCA and contributions from Council reserve funds. Council expenditure is to be regainedby leasing the site to DLLA for a premium of $3 million and annual leasing fees of $175,000. Although‘Olympic involvement is giving Council access to an extraordinary level of design and constructionexpertise and the resources of the OCA’ (RCC, 1998: 2), it is pertinent that this involvement has also ledto greater costs than if the Centre had not been an Olympic venue. Cost increases, SOCOG insistencethat the pool be indoors, and upgrading of the water filtration plant greatly increased the originalestimated costs of $7.1 million. The increase in the Olympic contribution from around $5 million and theagreement by the OCA in April 1999 that it would fund any further cost increases beyond the $24.5million (SMH, 8/4/99) supports the argument (section 2.3.1) that cost escalations are common inhallmark event planning. This partly answers Aim 2(b), indicating that the availability of large amountsof capital for hallmark events can be used to improve the quality of infrastructure, thereby increasing thephysical legacy to the community.


DLLA became involved as an equity partner in the RALC project when the proposal to rezone and sellpart of Olympic Park for residential development failed. Heads of Agreement between RCC and DLLAstated that following reclassification of Olympic Park to ‘operational’ land, a 50-year lease would beawarded to DLLA. Council’s two principal reasons for involving a private operator in a community facilitywere the investment and operating capital to be paid to Council by DLLA, and to gain the expertiseavailable in the private sector. As a RCC Director commented, ‘the equity partnership with a 50-yearlease is a good idea, at least from a bureaucrat’s point of view. It can be managed better by a privateoperator than if Council was operating it’ (Int. #2: 7). This agreement was indicative of RCC’s increasinglyentrepreneurial approach, in general, to the utilisation of community facilities and services. For example,Council’s RALC Project Officer commented ‘it’s just a matter of becoming more innovative . . . I thinkthey [councils] just have to manage their businesses in a more innovative manner’ (Int. #1 : 13). ThisOfficer further commented on the benefits of private sector involvement, in relation to the RALC: ‘[t]heprivate sector is a lot more feasible from our point of view because they have the expertise, it’s quite asophisticated Centre . . . So it can be a lot more flexible and business-like than what councils are used to’(Int. #1 : 12). These comments from Ryde Council employees clearly contain numerous tropes of thediscourse of entrepreneurialism and privatisation, for example, ‘innovation’, ‘flexibility’ and ‘sophistication’,thus indicating that Council officers had accepted the entrepreneurial notion that the private sector canmore efficiently operate community resources than the public sector.

The RALC and Olympic involvement will thus clearly have beneficial physical and economic legacies forthe Ryde community. Serious concerns have however been raised about the social and political legaciesof the RALC. Three principal areas of concern in relation to RCC’s entrepreneurial approach to theredevelopment and regarding Olympic involvement are: i) tokenistic community consultation and alack of transparency in government decision-making; ii) the inappropriate use of Olympic planningmechanisms and legislation, and iii) the impact upon the ownership or control of community facilitiesand services. These concerns within the community catalysed the formation of the resident actiongroup, Ryde Pool Action Group (RPAG).

As noted earlier (section 4.1.2), a number of consultative processes involving the community, includingsurveys, community forums and a Master Plan study, were conducted by RCC while preparing theleisure needs survey and the Master Plan Report. Since the OCA became involved in the developmenthowever, Council claimed that: ‘the deadlines imposed by the Olympic Games would not allow thetime originally planned for: i) refining the broad concepts proposed by the strategic assessment; ii) fullyinvolving and consulting the community’ (Brus, 1998: 6, emphasis added). From the outset, communityconsultation was also restricted by the confidentiality agreement required by the OCA. This agreement,which was ’unfortunately a fact of life’ (Int. #2: 3), prevented RCC from properly consulting the communityin the time between their bid for the SOWPV in October 1997 and the announcement of that bid inMarch 1998, as ‘no one was supposed to know who would bid’ (Int. #2: 3). Following the selection ofthe RALC as the SOWPV, a number of community consultations were then conducted by the OCA inrelation to the Development Application and by RCC in relation to the DLEPs. These processes includedCouncil meetings, Public Hearings into DLEP 90 and 98, and Planning Focus Meetings (community,government and industry). The DA was also advertised and submissions invited, and various informationnewsletters were distributed by the OCA and RCC.

The community consultation seems however to have been largely tokenistic and superficial, as will bedemonstrated using three examples. Firstly, it is arguable that the public and council meetings that wereconducted were little more than information meetings. For example, an OCA representative commentedthat ‘the public meetings [were] where we introduced the project, saying this is what we’re doing, andthen we’d also have an exhibition a bit like a normal development application’ (Int. #11: 3, emphasisadded). He further commented that ‘I can’t think of any major difference in substance that it [consultation]made to the proposal’ (Int. #11: 3). A member of RPAG also claimed that ‘the consultation has not reallybeen consultation but a lecture by Council’ and that the focus groups were merely ‘briefing groups’ (Int.#3: 15). The ‘community consultation’ conducted by the Council and


OCA thus largely appears to have been information provision rather than consultation.

Secondly, the decision to redevelop the RSC into the RALC and to involve a private operator seems tohave been constructed as a fait accompli and the consultation therefore tokenistic For example, demolitionof the pool began before DA approval was granted, and letters were sent to local Ryde schools on 15May 1998, before approval of either the DA or DLEP 90, stating that ‘it is Council’s intention to close theRyde Swimming Centre as from 12 October 1998. This closure is required to effect the redevelopmentof the Ryde Swimming Centre in conjunction with the Olympic Co-ordination Authority’ (RCC, letter toOur Lady Queen of Peace School, 15/5/98: 1). Further, at an ‘Information Meeting’ on the DA in November1998, a RCC Director said ‘the Ryde Aquatic Leisure Centre is a fait-accompli and I am not here todebate on whether it is being built, but to inform you on what is being built’ (McLaughlin, 1998: 20).These comments and events demonstrate a disregard by the Council for the democratic principle ofcommunity participation. Moreover, only one month lapsed between the commencement of negotiationsbetween RCC and DLLA and the acceptance of the RCC/OCA/DLLA redevelopment proposal at a Councilmeeting. Such a time frame does not allow for substantial and meaningful consultation, but rathersuggests that the decision to involve DLLA was a fait accompli.

Thirdly, it has been noted by members of RPAG that information disseminated by RCC has at times beenmisleading and inaccurate. This claim is partly substantiated by the response of RCC’s Director ofEnvironmental Standards to the charge that Council’s distributed literature about Ryde pool wasmisleading. She stated ‘I totally accept those comments as valid’ and ‘[i]t is not my job to answer forcouncil but yes, I do personally take your point’ (The Northern District Times (NDT), 5/98). RCC alsorefused to release substantial amounts of information about, for example, the negotiations with DLLA.Indeed numerous FOI requests made in relation to this study (see section 3.2) and by other journalistshave been refused using the ‘commercial confidentiality’ and Olympic exemptions under the FOI Act.

The processes described above demonstrate a lack of transparency in the decision-making processes ofRCC. Certainly, some degree of confidentiality may have been required for this redevelopment, and thedeadlines imposed by the Olympics required expeditious consultations. However, as the then localLiberal MP, Michael Photios, pointed out, the Ryde pool redevelopment is ‘the most significant localinfrastructure project to be approved by Ryde Council in two decades and it’s the communitys right toknow the finer details’ (SMH, 21/5/98). The undermining of the democratic rights of participation,openness and accountability is a detrimental social legacy of the local government quest for capital andprestige. This contributes to the destruction of social capital and public faith in urban governments.

The development of the RALC has taken place under SEPP 38, due to its role as an Olympic venue. TheMinister for UA&P approved a DA which included the entire RALC complex, even though it is only stage1 that is to be the SOWPV. Stage 2 will not even be constructed until after the Games. RCC and the OCAdefended the inclusion of stage 2 in the DA by claiming that the two stages are interconnected. The OCArepresentative commented that ‘[stage 2] was part of the whole development’ (Int. #11: 2), while theRyde Mayor, Councillor Peter Graham, claimed that approving both stages 1 and 2 ‘was probably thebest way to expedite approvals to get everything, because the design is one design’ (Triple J, 12/5/99:2). As a consequence of the whole complex being approved under SEPP 38 however, the communityhas been denied the opportunity to be properly consulted on facilities which will be operated by aprivate profit-motivated company. It is also possible that the entry price escalation might lead to asignificant proportion of the Ryde community being financially excluded from facilities located on a sitededicated to public recreation. Particular concerns have been expressed over the use of the Olympicslegislation for approving stage 2, which will have membership fees of approximately $1,608 per annum(Ryan, 1999: 72). The President of the RPAG believed that:

what’s happening here is that the streamlined Olympic processes are being used to give a legup to a private operator to establish a private members club on community land (Int. #3: 9).


It thus appears that the streamlined Olympic approval processes have been used to approve a 50-yearlease of public land, to an operator motivated by profit, with limited community consultation.

The lease of RALC to a private operator has also had significant implications for the ownership andcontrol of community facilities and services. While RCC will still own the facility, they will have only verylimited control over its use for the next 50 years. According to the Heads of Agreement, a Joint Committeeof Management would be established for the RALC, with representatives from DLLA, RCC and keygroups, possibly, for example, from the Ryde Swimming and Water Polo Clubs. This committee wouldhowever only have power to make recommendations as to, inter alia, building maintenance and entrypricing (Brus, 1998: 20, emphasis added). Involvement in the Olympics and the use of the streamlinedapproval processes may thus have alienated public land from the community and removed control fromtheir democratically responsible leaders. Indicating RCC’s general approach to the management ofcommunity facilities, the RALC Project Officer commented:

No I don’t think there’ll be less access. Probably, with the Ryde pool case, they have to pay acost, they have to get used to the concept of the local government not subsidising things. AndI think, with pools and facilities like that, Council does subsidise quite a lot of communitygroups and I think the trend is towards a more user-pays system (Int. #1: 14).

The loss of control and alienation of community resources is thus likely to continue in Ryde as a resultof the Council’s general entrepreneurialist bureaucratic approach.

4.1.4 Summary

Involvement in the Olympic Games and the redevelopment of the old RSC has provided the Rydecommunity with an impressive economic and physical legacy, in the form of the Ryde Aquatic LeisureCentre. RCC has embraced this hallmark event as an urban marketing and redevelopment tool, combiningit with an entrepreneurial attitude to governance in general. The planning processes for the RALC,incorporating the SOWPV, will however have significant social and political legacies for both the Rydecommunity and local urban governance. Negative legacies will flow from the poorer communityconsultation, lesser access to and control of community facilities, and degraded social capital.

4.2 WAVERLEY LOCAL GOVERNMENT AREA

4.2.1 Olympic Beach Volleyball, Bondi Beach

The Beach Volleyball event of the Sydney 2000 Olympics was located at Bondi Beach, in Sydney’seastern suburb of Bondi, in the Waverley LCA. Bondi Beach lies approximately 7 kilometres east of theSydney CBD and about 20 km east of Sydney Olympic Park at Homebush Bay (SA Smits &Associates PtyLtd, 1999: 5). The total site area for the temporary beach volleyball venue was 7.0 hectares, constitutingapproximately 34 per cent of Bondi Park and up to 20 per cent of Bondi Beach. This total area washowever required only from early August 2000 until the end of September 2000 (SA Smits & AssociatesPty Ltd, 1999: 5). The Olympic Beach Volleyball site also incorporated parts of Bondi Park, Bondi Pavilion,Bondi Surf Bathers’ Life Saving Club, and Bondi Beach Public School grounds (see Plates 4.3 and 4.4).


Plate 4.3: View of Bondi Park, Bondi Pavilion and Bondi Beachfrom Notts Ave, looking north.


Plate 4.4: View of Bondi Beach from Ramsgate Ave, looking south-west.Source: Author, 1999, Kodak 100, auto zoom


4.2.2 The process

Bondi Beach and Park have served as important public recreation areas since they were dedicated as apublic reserve in 1882. Bondi Beach is a national icon that is a major international tourist destinationand is the location of many cultural festivals and events, for example, the Festival of the Winds and theSouth American Festival of Music and Dance. Bondi Pavilion and Bondi Surf Bathers’ Life Saving Clubare also recognised as historically and culturally significant (Clive Lucas, Stapleton & Partners, 1997).

In mid-1997, Waverley Council (WAVC), as trustee of these areas, was invited by the OCA to bid to hostthe Olympic beach volleyball event (BVB). At this time, the OCA indicated that ‘they had a preferredoption for using Bondi for beach volleyball’ (Int. #7: 1). The Council then held a number of communitymeetings, through Waverley’s precinct system, and a general public meeting. On 2 August 1997, WAVCgave its support in principle to the Olympic beach volleyball and Olympic and Paralympic road cyclingbeing held in Bondi. The then Mayor, Councillor Barbara Armitage commented that ‘[t]he large majorityof Bondi residents are very excited to have the opportunity to show off their Bondi to the rest of theworld’ (Wilkinson, 1997: 10). From September 1997, WAVC participated with OCA and SOCOG in aProject Control Group which aimed to ensure that the Olympic events were properly planned and thatany costs were properly quantified (McMahon, 1998: 4). It was not until November 1998 however thatfurther detailed information about the BVB was made publicly available by the OCA. In the lead up tothe release of the Draft Statement of Environmental Effects (DSEE) for Olympic Beach Volleyball by theOCA on 7 April 1999, the OCA conducted planning focus meetings, attended public meetings anddistributed newsletters. The DSEE contained the ‘first detailed plans for the site’ (McDougall, 1999: 6)and its release was followed by substantial public debate and comment in newspapers, on radio, and atpublic meetings. Despite the growing sense of public disquiet and opposition, on 11 May 1999, WAVCvoted to continue supporting the OCA proposal to hold the BVB at Bondi. On this date, a Principles ofAgreement was signed as a preliminary document to the Master Agreement, agreed between the OCAand WAVC on 2 August 1999. The Development Application for the temporary BVB development wasapproved by the Minister for UA&P on 1 October 1999. The results of the NSW local government elections,held on 11 September 1999, threatened to cause problems in relation to the BVB. Although the Mayor,Councillor Paul Pearce, was re-elected to his position, a swing in the balance of power in the Councilenabled WAVC to pass a motion that Council seek more legal advice on its right to cancel its contract(the Master Agreement) with the OCA. Such a cancellation did not eventuate.

4.2.3 The impacts

The BVB development consisted of the erection and use of temporary structures on Bondi Beach,comprising a main competition stadium seating 10,000 spectators, a 400-seat secondary competitioncourt and five warm up/training courts. The stadium extended approximately 60 metres from thepromenade towards the water, and was about 90 metres wide and up to 16 metres above the beach onthe waterside (SA Smits & Associates Pty Ltd, 1999). The development took place progressively fromMay to October 2000. The preparations for and hosting of the event also required the temporary use of:Bondi Pavilion by competition and operations management and media; Bondi Surf Bathers’ Life SavingClub by the athletes; parts of Bondi Park for spectator marshalling, toilets, temporary accreditation andtelevision broadcast facilities; and Bondi Beach Public School grounds for Games-time parking (SASmits & Associates Pty Ltd, 1999).

The BVB development provided no permanent legacy for the sport of beach volleyball, however WaverleyCouncil negotiated a number of social and physical legacies for their community. The most significantphysical legacy was the improvements which the OCA agreed to fund for the Bondi Pavilion. Theseimprovements included the installation of a passenger lift with disabled access, repainting of the externalwalls of the Pavilion, internal refurbishment of the public toilets and showers in the Pavilion, andimprovements to the reticulation of electric power and communication (clause 2.1, Master Agreement,OCA and WAVC, 1999: 11-12). A social legacy was also provided in the form of a $30,000 financial grant


to the community services groups Norm Andrews House and WAYS (Waverley Action for Youth Services)(cl. 2.1). The OCA further agreed to indemnify WAVC against all actions, damages and expenses caused bythe wilful or negligent act or omission of OCA (cl. 10.4) and to reimburse Council the sum of $1,219,571for revenue shortfalls and operating costs (clauses 16.1, 16.2, 17.2, 17.4).

As in Ryde, the Waverley community was exposed to several negative legacies as a result of beinginvolved in the Sydney Olympics, three of which are discussed here. Firstly, there was considerabledisruption in the Bondi area from the increase in numbers of visitors and numerous road closures tofacilitate bus-only Olympic transport. In 1998 it was estimated that hosting the BVB would require inexcess of 30 road closures and the issuing of special passes to residents (McMahon, 1998: 8).

Secondly, there was expected be significant economic impacts on the local Bondi small businesses,although only for a temporary period. Some businesses would benefit greatly from the increase invisitor numbers and the festival atmosphere of the Games, for example, the hotels, bars and restaurants.Other retail traders would however suffer financially. For example, the Mayor of WAVC commented:

I don’t think that the Olympic people and to be frank the state government have really paidenough attention to the impact of this on the microeconomic aspects. Okay the macroeconomicaspects [will] probably be hundreds of millions of dollars of tourist dollars coming in and bigplayers will do very well out of it, but the micro impact, . . . the one who relies on the passingtrade, . . . they’re going to get hammered and there’s not going to be compensation for them(Int. #6: 23).

Such microeconomic impacts have further social legacies, creating tensions within the community. Theformer spokesperson for Bondi Olympic Watch (BOW), a resident action group formed in response tothe proposal to hold the BVB at Bondi, commented:

It’s been really divisive . . . You know there are some people, some shopkeepers who believethey’re going to do really well out of it. And they’re having quite bitter arguments with theirnext door neighbours who know they’re going to be severely done over . . . I guess the pub,for example, thinks ‘one off, this is going to be a huge money spinner for us and that’s great’,but the bookshop next door just knows it’s going to be atrociously bad (Int. #5: 13).

This comment demonstrates the socio-economic inequities which can result from entrepreneurial policies.Government focus on macroeconomic growth leads to a disregard for the equitable distribution ofinvestment and expenditure and the differential impacts on employment.

A third, although again temporary, negative legacy for the Waverley community from the BVB was thealienation of community land and resources. For example, the residents and users of the Bondi Pavilion,home of the Community Cultural Centre, were relocated during the Olympic BVB period. This relocationestablished a negative precedent; the alienation of community resources for large-scale, temporaryevents. Fortunately section 17 of the Master Agreement provided for the reinstatement of community,cultural and occasional users of the Pavilion at the conclusion of the Olympic period. Alienation of landalso resulted from restricted access to the beach, park and esplanade at times. These areas are importantleisure and recreational resources, not just for the Bondi community, but also for the wider Sydneycommunity. The Waverley community also lost control over their resources for a substantial period oftime due to the removal of planning powers from the local council under the Olympics legislation.These issues of alienation and control led to an interesting debate as to which community Bondi Beachand Park really belong to. Comments were made about how Bondi ‘belongs to all Australians, every oneof us’ (SMH, letter to editor, 15/7/99: 16), and that the Waverley residents were exhibiting ‘nothing butworld-class, Olympic gold medal winning selfishness’ and an extreme case of the NIMBY (not-in-my-backyard) syndrome (Day, 1999: 11; SMH, editorial, 9/4/99). Bondi certainly is of great symbolicimportance to most Australians. However, considerable disruption and alienation from this Olympicevent was borne by the community most proximate to, and most responsible for maintaining thisresource. The appropriateness of the BVB stadium as a means for presenting a great Australian icon tothe world was questioned, as was the incongruity of the stadium with the recreational


spirit of the area (Cashman, 1999). As one Watsons Bay resident commented:

The issue at Bondi is about the sheer natural beauty of the beach and the ocean and thestupidity of plonking a 10,000-seat stadium in the middle of that beach. All the subtlety of thefoot that crashes down at the start of Monty Python (SMH, Letter to Editor, 14/7/99: 16).

Despite these concerns about the appropriateness of the BVB for Bondi Beach, the Olympic organisingauthorities considered that locating the event at Bondi would be for the greatest benefit of the Games.

Although there were negative aspects to the legacy for the Waverley community, WAVC was able tonegotiate numerous positive legacies, which represented a significant improvement to those originallyoffered by the OCA. For example, the reimbursement of revenue shortfalls was not originally offered asa legacy by the OCA, but was a cost which the OCA expected Council to bear ‘for the benefit of being anAustralian, as part of the Olympic Games’ (Int. #7: 3). WAVC was not however swayed by this rhetoric intheir commitment to gaining the best possible outcome for their community. Rather, it had been madequite clear, since the release of information about the true size and impact of the stadium, that theCouncil was stridently opposed to the BVB stadium being constructed on Bondi Beach. Despite thisopposition, the Council continued to support their agreement given in principle in 1997, with the Mayorconsidering that it was not possible for the Council to stop the development (Int. #6: 2). Because theBVB was an Olympic event, WAVC’s consent powers in relation to the development had been superseded,and all approval powers were granted to the Minister for UA&P. The Mayor believed that if they opposedthe OCA's use of Bondi Beach and Park, then any power they had in negotiating the best outcome fortheir residents would be lost. The OCA ‘would speak to the owners . . . the state government’ and theMinister for Lands could simply issue a licence for this temporary event under the Crown Lands Act1989 (NSW) (Int. #6: 1, 4). This belief that the decision to hold the BVB event at Bondi was a faitaccompli has been supported by numerous statements from the OCA. For example, an OCA mediarelease on 4 November 1998, before the release of any detailed plans on the development, stated‘Waverley will host the Beach Volleyball competition at Bondi Beach’ (OCA, 1998b, author’s emphasis).A consultant to the OCA also confirmed in a letter to WAVC that ‘there is no ‘Plan B’ for Beach Volleyball’(Michael Collins & Associates Pty Ltd, letter to WAVC, 27/4/99). These circumstances again clearly indicatethe potential for Olympic events to exclude normal planning processes and to subjugate local oppositionby streamlining approvals and conferring significant powers on organising bodies.

As outlined above, the OCA did conduct community consultation in relation to the BVB. However, theimpression that the decision to hold the BVB at Bondi was a fait accompli suggests that this communityconsultation was effectively tokenistic. The former spokesperson for BOW considered that:

I don’t think there’s actually been community consultation. It’s community information.They’ve simply come along and said ‘this is what we’re doing, this is how we’re doing it,that’s all there is to it’. There’s been no real consultation, consultation as far as ‘do youthink we should do this?’ (Int. #5: 8).

This comment indicates a lack of meaningful consultation in the critical strategic planning stages. Suchan interpretation is supported by the information provided early by the OCA on the development, whichappeared to be misleading. For example, the original plans in 1997 suggested a total Olympic period atBondi of two to three months, while the Statement of Environmental Effects (SEE) indicates an Olympicperiod of up to six months. A certain degree of confidentiality was also maintained by the OCA overrelevant documents. However, in contrast to OCA’s secretive and tokenistic approach was WAVC’s moredemocratic approach. WAVC refused to maintain the confidentiality of some key documents, for examplethe Master Agreement, and also insisted on involving the community directly, through, for example,well-publicised public meetings.

The consultation the OCA conducted with the community and the public opposition to the developmentdid however have a positive impact on the planning processes. The public outcry and submissions onthe DSEE led to the OCA making changes to the design of the BVB stadium, including the removal of


the proposed bridge from the Pavilion to the stadium’s VIP stand, and reductions in the height of thestadium (Evans, 1999: 10). WAVC also believed that the strong community opposition assisted them innegotiating a greater community legacy. Mayor, Pearce proudly commented:

I think it [the community opposition] probably strengthened my hand in the negotiations.You had a series of public relations disasters for the Olympics [the IOC scandals] and at thesame time, Bondi was the first community which actually took the Olympics on. The rest ofSydney has just rolled over and had its tummy tickled on this. [The] Bondi communitystood up to them and the Council stood up to them . . . and I think the pressure from theWaverley community down there very much strengthened mine and the General Manager’shand in negotiating (Int. #6: 14-15).

The events in Waverley demonstrate that community opposition to proposed events remains importantin securing positive legacies and concessions from hallmark event organisers. It also suggests that thetypically fait accompli nature of hallmark developments can in some circumstances be successfullyresisted, that positive benefits for the community can be achieved and that community dissent need notbe marginalised. These issues are further discussed in Chapter 6. The Bondi case also confirms thepostulation in Aim 2(b) that the large amounts of capital available for hallmark events can be used tosatisfy dissenting communities. In Waverley this resulted in a greater benefit for the community.

The planning processes for the Olympic BVB have had an important positive democratic outcome for thecommunity, particularly through the reinforcement of WAVC’s attitude to community consultation. TheGeneral Manager commented on the general approach of WAVC to public participation in urban governance:‘we’ve always had a very strong commitment to community consultation . . . In fact sometimes to theextreme, things don’t happen here without huge community consultation’ (Int. #7: 11). The outcome ofthe BVB development, according to the Mayor, was that ’it’s reinforced our approach to communityconsultation and community involvement . . . I think it proved the strength of it’ (Int. #6: 17). The value ofinvolving the community early in the process, a key indicator of more meaningful forms of public involvementwas also recognised (lnt. #7: 11). Although social capital may have been damaged by these events, thedamage may be restored through the long-term renewed commitment of the Council to meaningfulcommunity consultation. WAVC thus demonstrated a very democratic approach to urban planning for theOlympics and in general. The General Manager of WAVC also commented that Council ‘regard ourselves aslooking after the interests of the community, first of all, more than ourselves’ (Int. #7: 14). Such rhetoricindicates that WAVC has not adopted the entrepreneurial approach of neglecting democratic principlesand welfare concerns in response to central government restructuring.

4.2.4 Summary

Hosting an Olympic event enabled WAVC to improve community facilities at Bondi Beach at a notinsignificant cost to the OCA, and to secure an important social legacy for the community. Whetherthese positive outcomes will, in the long-term, mitigate the negative legacies of the Olympic BVB eventat Bondi, including tokenistic community consultation and reduced public access to community resources,remains to be seen. The community can however be satisfied in the reinforcement of the Council’sseemingly more progressive attitude to community participation, openness and accountability (Aim 4).Perhaps the planning of this Olympic venue may even have forced the OCA and the State Governmentto realise the benefits of public involvement, such as better planning and enhanced social capital.

4.3 AUBURN LOCAL GOVERNMENT AREA

4.3.1 Sydney Olympic Park, Homebush Bay

Sydney Olympic Park (SOP), Homebush Bay is located in Auburn LGA and was the principal site ofOlympic and Paralympic venues and facilities (see Figure 4.1). Auburn LGA is located 30 kilometresfrom the Sydney CBD and had a population of almost 51,000 at the 1996 Census. Of these, 48.2 per


cent are estimated to have been born in a non-English speaking country (Auburn Council (AUBC),1998a: 2). Auburn is also a LGA of socio-economic disadvantage, with relatively lower incomes, higherproportions of dwellings being rented and very high rates of unemployment in comparison with SydneyMetropolitan averages (AUBC, 1998a: 4). Much of the land comprising SOP was already owned by theState and Federal Governments, having been the site of, for example, the State Abattoir and the NewingtonArmaments Depot (Figure 4.1).

Figure 4.1: Past, present and proposed land uses, Sydney Olympic Park, New South WalesSource: Dunn, K.M. and McGuirk, P.M., 1999


4.3.2 The process

Homebush Bay has been an important cultural and economic site since Aboriginal times. The area isremembered by the Darug and Eora/Dharawal peoples as a meeting place or special place, where thecoastal and inland people met, and as a place of Law (Lee, 1999). Since the European colonisation ofAustralia, the area has been used as farmland and as sites for industry. In 1991, the Homebush Abattoirwas removed from the site, which was placed under the management of the Homebush Bay MinisterialCorporation (HMC). In 1993 the HMC was replaced by the Homebush Bay Development Corporation(HBDC). Two centuries of poor management and disregard for the environment had effectively leftHomebush Bay as degraded, contaminated wasteland. Soil testing in the early 1990s showed thatabout 160 hectares of the 760 hectare site was contaminated with domestic, commercial and industrialchemical wastes (OCA Ecology Programs, 1999). Sydney’s successful bid for the 2000 Olympic Gamesprovided the impetus for the remediation and redevelopment of Homebush Bay into the Sydney OlympicPark (SOP). This site was the location for approximately half of all the venues that were used for theGames (Int. #11: 8). Land which belonged to the Commonwealth Government was also acquired byOCA, contributing to the areas which were developed as the Olympic Athletes’ and Media Villages. TheAthletes’ Village became a residential development in the suburb of Newington after the Olympics.

The OCA was responsible for developing SOP and complied with the consultation requirements of theOCA Act for each venue through advertising Development Applications, notifying interested bodies, andconducting planning focus meetings and briefings. Auburn Council (AUBC), as the LGA in which SOP islocated, had some involvement in the planning of the site, mostly through its responsibility for providing‘a range of services and infrastructure that will support the running of the Olympic Games on a localgovernment level’ (Int. #8: 1). These services included waste, roads and traffic management. They werealso involved in the design, certification and approvals for many venues, especially the Athletes’ Village,as AUBC will be the body responsible for the post-Olympic maintenance and use of these facilities. Inorder to co-ordinate their responsibilities, AUBC established an Olympic Co-ordination Unit in May1998 to ‘ensure that Council can respond to Olympic needs in a co-operative and practical way tosupport the timely, efficient and effective development of Homebush Bay’ (AUBC, 1998b: 1).

4.3.3 The impacts

The greatest legacy for the Auburn community is the physical infrastructure that was constructed in theAuburn LGA for the Olympics. The quality, diversity and number of facilities in the SOP mean that thissite is likely to become the major sporting and recreational centre in Sydney (OCA, 1997a). The site nowincludes facilities such as the Olympic Stadium, the Sydney International Athletics and Aquatic Centres,the State Sports Centre, a hotel, the Athletes’ and Media Villages, and many more. The Royal AgriculturalSociety has also been based within the SOP. These facilities have been described as ‘the best venues inthe world’ (Int. #11: 10), presenting AUBC with enormous marketing opportunities. Auburn will alsobenefit from the remediation of a toxic, derelict industrial area, which has also facilitated a symbolicrestructuring of the Homebush area. Residents also have access to the Millennium Parklands, which willform Sydney’s largest metropolitan parkland (OCA, 1997b). A final physical legacy for Auburn is the highstandard residential developments being constructed as the Athletes’ and Media Villages.

In terms of the economic legacy of the Olympic Games for Auburn, there has been

some Olympic-related employment generated through the construction work and . . . throughthe services that are being provided at the Olympics, the housekeeping services in the Village,the food and beverage services in the Stadium and that sort of thing (Int. #10: 3).

AUBC has however experienced a negative economic legacy as a result of involvement in the OlympicGames. With the closure of the abattoirs and assumption of control by the HBDC, the Homebush Baysite became exempt from rates. A section of rateable industrial land was also transferred to StrathfieldLGA in 1992, in return for the transfer of the State Sports Centre land to Auburn LGA This transfer was


logistically necessary to ensure that all of SOP was within one LGA, but for Auburn it constituted afurther loss of potential rates income, for which only eighteen months worth of rates have beencompensated. The impact for Auburn is a loss of approximately $1 million per annum in rates,approximately 5 per cent of total rate revenue (AUBC, 1999: 1). A financial impact assessment preparedfor the OCA estimated that AUBC would continue to suffer a revenue shortfall until the year 2007(AUBC, 1999).

The negative economic legacy and diversion of Council resources to Olympic projects has an adversesocial cost for the community of Auburn. It had been suggested that AUBC should increase ratesthroughout the rest of the LGA in order to offset the losses from the SOP. The Council decided not to doso, principally because the residents would be incapable of coping with such an increase, given thatAuburn is an area of high unemployment and low household incomes (AUBC, 1999). The revenueshortfall has however had a negative impact on community and youth services and programs. Forexample, the appointment of a strategic planner and the preparation of a Social Plan were postponed,as were planned improvements to the libraries and the provision of new youth facilities (Int. #10: 6;AUBC, 1999). A further social cost may be experienced by the Auburn community from the residentialdevelopments of the Athletes’ and Media Villages, which have the potential to develop into highersocio-demographic enclaves. The General Manager of AUBC pointed out how the annual million dollarrate loss could have been invested in basic community facilities which could have helped prevent a‘tremendous social disparity between Newington (the Athletes’ Village) and the rest of Auburn (Int. #8:7). The concern of AUBC for maintaining socio-economic equity and municipal services for all, ratherthan focussing on the new residential developments, indicates a managerial approach to urbangovernance by AUBC.

The Olympics will also have other social legacies for Auburn. Millennium Parklands will provide a vitaland beneficial recreation and leisure resource, and the sporting facilities in the SOP will be utilised by,for example, local schools. However, access for the general Auburn community to what are regional ornational facilities may be restricted. An AUBC Director commented, for example,

with the sporting facilities, . . . they’re regional facilities or national facilities, you know, theexample I keep using a bit facetiously is that the East Silverwater Under 12 Maulers, therugby league team, can’t kick the Wallabies off the Stadium and kick the ball around. Soit’s a great facility, but what does it actually do in terms of providing recreational facilitiesfor our local community – probably not a great deal (Int. #9: 3).

The local community is thus gaining physical and economic legacies from the Olympic facilities, but itcould be said that they are also suffering a social cost from limited access to community resources.

It is thus clear that the Olympic Games will have numerous positive and negative impacts in Auburn.The Council has however been unable to fully quantify the extent of these impacts due to a lack ofinvolvement in early planning and the inadequate provision of information by the OCA. The SOP hadbeen planned as the main Olympic site since 1993, although it appears that AUBC was not involved inany of the initial planning. This included a lack of consultation in relation to the transfer of land toStrathfield LGA. The General Manager of AUBC in 1999 suggested that, to some extent, this lack ofinvolvement could have been a result of the Council’s inaction (Int. #8: 1, 2). This attitude and positionof AUBC has changed remarkably, but the General Manager considered that the growing willingness ofthe Council to be involved and to seek the best outcome for all people has not been supported by theOlympic organising bodies (Int. #8: 4).

AUBC also had great difficulty in securing the OCA’s attention to local concerns. Comments incorrespondence between AUBC and the OCA illustrate the OCA’s apparent disregard for the Council’sconcerns:

I understandfrom Auburn

that you have greater things to be concerned about other than the issuesCouncil. Nevertheless it is a significant issue for Auburn and I seek your


assistance to resolve this impasse as soon as possible (AUBC, letter to OCA, 4/9/97: 1).

AUBC also had difficulty in obtaining access to vital planning information, from both the OCA and theprivate developers, such as Theiss Contractors and Concrete Constructions. For example, the OCA did notprovide AUBC with a copy of the report of the financial impact study for over 12 months. AUBC’s efforts toproperly plan for and mitigate any adverse impacts of the Games on their community were thus clearlyconstrained by the lack of openness and co-operation from the OCA.

The community consultation conducted by the Olympic organising authorities was quite minimal due tomuch of the land being State Government owned. The OCA complied with its statutory consultationrequirements in relation to, for example, advertising DAs and holding public meetings. Such meetingswere conducted particularly in relation to urban domain impacts of the Olympics, for example, theimpacts of road closures on businesses near the SOP. However, the Manager of AUBC’s Olympic Co-ordination Unit commented that:

I think we’re looking at a quarter nearly of the municipality where the Auburn communityreally hasn’t had a say in what’s happening there, to anything like the extent that it hashad in the other three quarters, and I think that’s a real cost (Int. #10: 11).

The representation of community views was also limited by the apparent superficiality of much of theconsultation between the OCA and AUBC. The General Manager of AUBC considered that:

Council are very aggrieved at what’s happened to Auburn and what’s been taken from themby the Olympics and the manner in which they’ve been treated, which is just walked overthe top of and no regard whatsoever for them as elected members (Int. #8: 11).

This view sharply contrasts to that of the OCA representative that ‘I think Auburn Council is generallyhappy with what’s going on but they did have some problems with the Athletes’ Village and they didn’tget their way entirely (Int. #11: 10).

AUBC had itself conducted very little community consultation in relation to the Olympics, although itappeared that this would change over the year leading up to the Olympics as the community wasinvolved in the regeneration of the Auburn urban domain in order to improve the area’s image for theGames. Meaningful community consultation in Auburn in general is difficult. The LGA exemplifies manyof the constraints upon public consultation, with language difficulties due to the high proportion ofresidents from non-English speaking countries, generally poor literacy levels, and the Council’s lack offinancial resources (Int. #9: 6). Nevertheless, meaningful community involvement was barely given achance in relation to the Olympics in Auburn.

Looking at the general approach to urban governance, AUBC displays an interesting blend ofentrepreneurialism, managerialism, democratisation and what might be called political naivety. TheOlympic Games offered Auburn Council, as the ‘Home of the 2000 Olympics’, an opportunity to transforma neglected area into one of regional, state, national and international significance (AUBC, 1998c: 3).The Council officers recognised the opportunities offered by the Olympics for improving the image ofthe local area, commenting: ‘we’d be mad not to try and piggyback off having that [SOP] there’ (Int. #9:4). AUBC is however committed to looking after the best interests of their community, as was evident intheir desire that the new suburb of Newington be integrated into the LGA, with no socio-demographicenclave created. Through the Olympics, AUBC was also trying to establish better lines of communicationwith their community. These approaches suggest that managerial and democratic concerns remainimportant to AUBC.

4.3.4 Summary

The Olympics will provide an exceptional physical legacy for the Auburn LGA, although the accessibilityof these regional or national facilities to the general Auburn community may be limited. In the shortterm at least, the economic, social and political impacts of the planning for the Sydney Games in Auburnhave largely been negative, particularly through the lack of meaningful consultation, the


exclusion of the Council from many aspects of the planning of a large area of land in the Auburn LGA,and the lack of effective strategies to account for the impacts of a significant financial shortfall for AUBC.In the longer term, there may be benefits from the revitalisation of the area and the investment of profitfrom SOP in the wider community.

4.4 CONCLUSION

This chapter demonstrates that the extent and nature of the impacts of a hallmark event are spatiallydiverse. The Sydney 2000 Olympics have had the greatest benefits for local areas through the physicalinfrastructure constructed or improved for the Games. The economic and social impacts varied however,both within and between the LGAs studied. The Olympics preparations invested large amounts of capitalin local areas, but variously increased the original costs of redevelopment, alienated public land fromcommunity ownership and control, potentially exacerbated socio-economic inequalities, and limited theextent of community consultation. The greatest diversity in the local impacts of the Games is seen in thepolitical outcomes. Differences in local government responses to the entrepreneurial planning processeswere dependent upon varying local characteristics and attitudes of councils and communities. It is thereforeimportant that local impacts are adequately addressed in studies of hallmark events. Greater awareness ofthe diversity of impacts should enable the planning of hallmark events with fewer negative and inequitableimpacts.


CHAPTER 5: ENTREPRENEURIALISM IN THEPLANNING OF THE SYDNEY OLYMPICSIn this chapter instances of entrepreneurialism in the planning of the Sydney 2000 Olympics are examined,thereby addressing the second aim of the study. Particular attention is given to the role of local governmentin the planning of this hallmark event, as well as to the reactions of local governments to theentrepreneurial policies of state and federal governments. The role of local government in contemporarysystems of urban governance has been neglected in the literature on hallmark events andentrepreneurialism (Hall and Hubbard, 1998). Instances of entrepreneurialism in the planning of theSydney Games will be examined with reference to government restructuring and the relaxation ofplanning processes. These features have been recognised as important characteristics of entrepreneurialisturban governance (see Chapter 2).

5.1 GOVERNMENT RESTRUCTURING

The restructuring of government relations is a typical feature of entrepreneurial regimes, often involvingthe centralisation of power and the increasing involvement of the private sector (Anderson, 1990: 480;Harvey, 1989). This section examines the impact of the special Olympic planning processes on governmentstructures in respect of inter-government relations and the involvement of the private sector.

5.1.1 Restructuring of inter-governmental relations

Staging the Olympics was without doubt an immense task, requiring Government support in areas includinghealth and medical services, security and police, management of waterways, and management of transportsystems (Richmond, 1999: 6). The co-ordination of the many different government departments involvedin planning the Olympics was essential to ensure the smooth preparation and operation of the Games. Tofacilitate this co-ordination and preparation, special Olympics legislation was enacted, as outlined in section1.3.1. This legislation consolidated and centralised planning powers with the State Government and withthe statutory authorities which were responsible to that Government, particularly the OCA. The legislativechanges removed planning power from local governments, vesting consent authority for ‘all developmentfor the purpose of an Olympic Games project or an OCA project’ with the Minister for Urban Affairs andPlanning (UA&P) (SEPP 38, clauses 5&6). This centralisation of planning power for the Olympics is analogousto the centralisation of power that is identified as a characteristic of entrepreneurial governance, wherebylocal government control of developments is removed (Anderson, 1990: 480).

The centralisation of planning power has the impact that particular developments are planned primarilywith a regional or national perspective, thereby marginalising local issues. The Olympics legislationeffectively allowed the planning of Olympic venues to be conducted in isolation from holistic localgovernment planning, as approval powers were vested with the Minister for UA&P and not local councils.The State Government and the OCA were concerned with staging an international sporting event,presenting the best image to a global audience and maximising macroeconomic gains. They were muchless concerned than local governments with the local, site-specific impacts of venues. For example, boththe Mayor and General Manager of Waverley Council (WAVC) considered that their Council would neverhave approved the beach volleyball stadium, due to the disruption it will cause to residents and tenantsof the Pavilion, and the inappropriateness of the stadium for the beach. Taking into account Olympicobligations and regional considerations however, the stadium was approved by the Minister for UA&P. Ithas been noted that the centralisation of planning power for entrepreneurial or hallmark developmentstends to result in a piecemeal approach to urban development that lacks strategic foresight or long termplanning (Hall and Hubbard, 1996).

Representatives of local governments were also concerned that the regional perspective of the State


Government resulted in a lack of attention to local economic and social impacts. In particular, the Mayorof WAVC believed that there was a ‘lack of proper social impact assessment being done in relation to theOlympic events’, especially in relation to the impacts on homelessness and rent increases (Int. #6: 14,22). This view was supported by the concern expressed by employees of the NSW Department of FairTrading that the Olympics was having an adverse impact on rent levels, despite Government claims tothe contrary (Moore, 1999: 14). Such local impacts of the Sydney Olympics are a source of concern, asregional perspectives towards developments become more dominant with the growth of entrepreneurialgovernance.

5.1.2 Private sector involvement

Sydney’s bid for the 2000 Games was led by the Sydney Olympic Bid Committee (SOBC), a powerfulconsortium of some of Sydney’s most influential private and public sector actors. In SOBC, all threelevels of the Australian political system were represented, along with corporate interests (Waitt andFurrier, 1999). The Olympic organising authorities, SOCOG, OCA, SPOC and ORTA, established followingthe successful bid by SOBC, were all statutory corporations with representatives from both the privateand public sectors. These authorities are representative of the special planning agencies that are usuallyestablished to organise hallmark events (Cochrane et al., 1996) and of the public-private partnershipsthat are characteristic of entrepreneurialist governance (Harvey, 1989: 7).

The influence of the private sector and their entrepreneurial, capitalist principles was thus very strong inthe organisation of the Sydney Games. The Director-General of the OCA, for example, commented:

OCA is a public sector organisation, which fosters an environment of creativity and innovationand seeks to combine the energy and initiative found in entrepreneurial organisations withthe accountability to Parliament required of public sector services funded by taxpayers(Richmond, 1999: 2).

The rhetoric of entrepreneurialism is obvious in the above comment. The involvement of private,entrepreneurial organisations was justified by the assumed innovation, creativity and initiative they offerto developments. The private sector was also heavily involved in the construction and operation of Olympicvenues and facilities. Exemplifying the partnerships between private developers and the State Government‘are the Stadium and the Superdome, where they are essentially private developments with a governmentsubsidy’ (Int. #11: 6). Similarly, the Mirvac Lend Lease Village Consortium constructed and operated theAthletes’ Village, with a State Government contribution of $63.8 million toward construction costs (OCA,1997b; OCA, 1998a: 8).

The high level of involvement of the private sector in the Sydney Olympics is indicative of the trendtowards a greater involvement of private interests in Australian urban governance in general. In thecontemporary period of fiscal restraint, State and Federal Governments have resorted to increasingprivatisation, with $61 billion worth of public assets sold in the past decade (Edwards, 1999: 4). Thisprivatisation is typically justified by the entrepreneurial trope that ‘public ownership is less efficient thanprivate ownership’ (Edwards, 1999: 4). The authors of a report published by the Productivity Commissionnoted however that there has actually been little analysis of such putative efficiency, and that ‘much ofthe debate on privatisation involves rhetoric rather than research’ (King and Pitchford, quoted in Edwards,1999: 4).

The three LGAs subject of this study have exhibited a range of responses to the centralisation of planningpower, privatisation of public assets and increasing fiscal restraint that are evident in the NSWGovernment’s approach to planning for the Olympics and in general (Murphy and Wu, 1999). In Ryde,the involvement of the private operator, DLLA, in the RALC development and the entrepreneurialjustifications for this involvement (section 4.1.3) are indicative of RCC’s entrepreneurial approach tourban governance in general. For example, the Director-Governance of RCC claimed that the Council’sstrategic goal for sports grounds, outlined in the 1996 Plan of Management:


is being pursued within the constraints imposed by Council’s publicly stated operationalobjective of managing where practicable within the limits imposed by the State Government’spolicy of revenue pegging. The mechanism for achieving this is by increasing earnings frompublic facilities and services . . . and establishing relationships with the private sector (Jordan,1999:4).

RCC is clearly responding to the changing relations with the NSW Government by also adopting theentrepreneurialist strategy of increasing the involvement of the private sector in the operation of publicfacilities and services (Aim 3(b)).

The response of WAVC to central government changes has however been quite different to that of RCC,with the Council retaining ownership of many community resources. The Mayor of WAVC argued, forexample, that ‘there’s no good reason why privatising services and contracting out of services shouldlead to a) better services or b) cheaper services’ when the public sector does not operate on a profitmargin like the private sector (Int. #6: 21). WAVC does however acknowledge the need to be efficientand competitive in the provision of community services. Rather than contracting out or privatisingcommunity facilities and services, WAVC has investigated and implemented innovative ways of managingtheir resources, for example resource sharing with other councils, to achieve a higher level of servicequality while also maintaining community ownership (Int. #7: 13).

Auburn Council has also retained ownership and control of many community facilities and services. Theyreasoned that by retaining public ownership the Council is better able to provide employment for theirresidents as well as to maintain costs at an acceptable level (Int. #8: 14). An AUBC Director furthercommented that ‘we try and overlay a social conscience on top of the economic rationalism [of centralgovernments]’ (Int #9: 11). The resistance of both AUBC and WAVC to the privatisation of public assetsindicates that managerial concerns remain an important element of urban governance in some LGAs.

The restructuring of government relations that occurred in the planning of the Sydney Olympics clearlyemulates the restructuring that occurs with the transition to entrepreneurial governance in general.Planning powers were centralised, regional perspectives were applied to developments that will havesignificant local impacts, and the increasing involvement of the private sector was significant. In responseto these changes occurring in both Olympic and general planning, local governments exhibit a variety ofresponses which indicate that entrepreneurialism has not come to dominate local urban governance.

5.2 RELAXATION OF PLANNING PROCESSES

The special legislation enacted for the Olympics centralised and consolidated planning powers with theState Government and the Olympic organising authorities in order to ensure the effective co-ordinationof the Games, as discussed in section 5.1.1. The legislation has also acted to relax and streamlinenormal planning processes, and to fast-track Olympic developments. This section discusses the impactsof the Olympics legislation on openness and accountability to the community and on public participationin planning.

5.2.1 Openness and accountability

Due to the enactment of special legislation, Olympic developments were subject to less onerous planningprocesses than under normal legislation. For example, under s.23 of the OCA Act, any developmentcarried out by the OCA was not considered a designated development, and thus was not subject to anyappeals process. Further, environmental impact statements did not have to be prepared, although theStatements of Environmental Effects (SEE) that were produced by the OCA usually contained a similarlevel of detail to that required in an environmental impact statement.

The relaxation of planning processes enabled the organising authorities to have Olympic facilities readynearly 12 months in advance of the opening date. However, the changes resulted in reduced accountabilityto the community in relation to the planning of Olympic developments. It seems that


the lack of rights of appeal, in particular, enabled the approval of developments that would probably nothave been approved under normal processes. An OCA representative agreed with this analysis, statingthat if local councils were the consent authority for the types of developments occurring, ‘they wouldn’tdo it [approve], because they couldn’t get away with it. They’d be subject to an appeal in the Court andit couldn’t be supported’ (Int. #11: 7). In Ryde, for example, some community members were of theopinion that the current land zoning would have prevented the approval of the privately operated RALCunder normal planning processes. The General Manager of WAVC postulated a justification for thestreamlining of development approvals, commenting that ‘I think they accepted that councils, becauseof their democratic state and democratic nature, would not have tolerated the type of intrusion uponthe local community as a result of this’ (Int. #7: 10). These comments demonstrate clearly, that byremoving planning power from local governments, the Olympic organisers were much less accountableto the community than under normal circumstances. This situation is analogous to the impacts of theexemptions that quasi-public bodies, such as the Newcastle Honeysuckle Development Corporation,are often granted by entrepreneurial governments (McGuirk et al., 1998).

The Olympic organising authorities were also accused of lacking openness in their procedures and ofproviding inadequate information for both local councils and communities. As noted in section 3.2,Olympic documents are exempt from FOI legislation and a very high level of confidentiality was maintainedin relation to all Olympic operations. The OCA lacked openness even regarding the supply of informationto councils partially responsible for Olympic venues (see section 4.3.3). An example of the lack ofopenness and transparency in the organisation of the Olympics occurred with the public sale of ticketsto Olympic events, where SOCOG made no disclosure of the limited number of tickets that would bemade available to the public (SMH, 30/10/99).

The local governments hosting the Olympic venues subject of this study displayed diverse reactions tothe lack of openness and transparency legitimated by the Olympics legislation. RCC maintained a veryhigh level of confidentiality over all documents relating to the RALC, claiming the Olympic and commercialconfidentiality exemptions from the FOI Act. It was this lack of openness that Ryde community membersvociferously challenged. In contrast, WAVC insisted on providing their community with as much informationas possible.

The involvement of the private sector and the relaxation of planning processes that were fundamentalto the efficient, successful planning of the Sydney Olympics are analogous to the changes to planningprocesses occasioned by entrepreneurial governments (Aim 2). A member of RPAG commented on theimpacts of the Olympics legislation:

Olympic developments are big, fast, political trains and harder to fight because they areexempt from most state legislation and a law unto themselves. The normal avenues forcomplaints are closed off (Lawrence, quoted in Latham, 1998: 7).

This statement exemplifies the criticisms of lack of openness and accountability which have been directedat the Olympic organising authorities. These criticisms are similar to those often made about the planningof entrepreneurial developments (McGuirk et al., 1998: 120).

5.2.2 Community consultation

The Olympic organising authorities were subject to statutory community consultation requirements fordevelopments requiring consent from the Minister for UA&P, as defined in clause 9, SEPP 38, andsection 24, OCA Act. In general, it appears that these requirements were satisfied. For example,development applications were properly advertised, focus meetings and public information meetingswere held and relevant authorities were consulted. The OCA also consulted with the local councils ofareas in which venues were located, and of adjoining council areas. However, the extensiveness andmeaning of community consultation varied between Olympic venues depending on the role of theOlympic organising authorities and the response of local governments and communities to theconsultation processes and development per se.


An initial comment can be made about the role of local governments in general in the planning of theOlympics, bearing in mind that consultation with local councils is an important mechanism throughwhich to ensure that communities are properly informed of planning processes. Numerous committees,such as the Local Government Liaison Committee, were established to facilitate consultation and involvelocal governments. However the value afforded to such local government representations by the OCAwas questioned. The General Manager of AUBC commented, for example, that:

We’re on a lot of what I call paper bag committees . . . Yes we’re on a lot of committees, . . . butI really question the substance or the impact or the effect that any of those have (Int. #8: 2).

The President of the NSW Local Government Association also opined that:

The avenues for local government involvement have been tokenistic at best. Local governmenthas not been given any real say in the decision making process, in many instances it has beenblatantly excluded (Woods, quoted in Sproats, 1997: 38).

These comments indicate that the opportunity for local government involvement in the planning of theOlympics was at times curtailed and of limited value. They also support the argument in section 5.1.1above that many Olympic developments were planned with a regional perspective that disregards localpriorities and concerns.

The responses of local governments to the consultative processes of the OCA were quite diverse. AUBCwas fairly accepting of the consultation processes imposed on them by the Olympic organising authorities,conducting little consultation themselves to enhance community involvement. As the Olympicsapproached however, the Council made concerted attempts to involve the community in the urbandomain planning and in devising strategies to increase the benefit of the Olympics to the community,for example, by hosting a foreign Olympic team. In contrast, WAVC challenged the entrepreneurialapproach of the OCA, insisting that the community be fully informed of negotiations and that communityopinions be heard. The Council itself organised public meetings and provided financial support to theresident action group Bondi Olympic Watch. Ryde City Council (RCC) however provides an example ofentrepreneurialism operating at the local government level. As discussed in section 4.1.3, in relation tothe reclassification of Olympic Park and the redevelopment RSC, the decisions seemed to be a faitaccompli, and the community consultation conducted by the Council appeared to be tokenistic andsuperficial. Contrasting with the approach of WAVC, RCC accepted and applied the less stringentcommunity consultation requirements of the Olympics to a development with significant social impacts.

The Olympic organising authorities were required to conduct a considerable amount of communityconsultation for the Sydney Olympics. The nature and extent of this consultation however varied considerablybetween Olympic venues and between LGAs. Combined with the lack of openness and accountability,essential components of meaningful consultation, displayed by the Olympic authorities (section 5.2.1),consultation with both communities and local governments tended to lack meaning and value. This featureof the planning of the Sydney Olympics is similar to the tokenistic consultation which often occurs underentrepreneurial regimes of governance (Hall and Hubbard, 1996; Ward, 1997). The Olympics legislationhas also enabled the approval, without sufficient community consultation, of important community facilitiesthat should be integrated in holistic local government planning. In Ryde, for example, while the RALC wasalready planned as a means of meeting the long-term recreation needs of the community, the 50-yearlease of a community facility to a private operator should have been approved through normal, strictapproval processes.

5.2.3 Justifying the Olympic legislation

The special Olympics legislation effected significant changes to normal planning and consultativeprocesses. There is no doubt that overall co-ordination and consistency at a central government levelwas required in the planning of the Olympics, given that planning for a development of the scale of


the Sydney Olympics is ‘beyond the resources of councils to deal with’ (Int. #11: 8). However, theOlympics legislation did not simply centralise planning powers. It was an ‘incredibly draconian piece oflegislation’ (Int. #6: 10) that severely limited and degraded democratic principles of openness,accountability and public participation in planning.

In the course of this research, the strict deadlines the Olympic planning processes had to meet were notoften referred to specifically as a problem. However, it was clear that these deadlines and the need forcertainty in development, were principal reasons for the implementation of such draconian legislation.If the Olympics had been planned under normal regulations, it is possible that Sydney would not havebeen ready in September 2000 to stage the Games, given the commitment of most local councils todemocratic processes and the delay that could have been caused by appeals of development approvals.As the OCA representative commented, ‘we do need the confidence in being able to deliver things intime and a degree of confidence that we are going to get a development consent’ (Int. #11: 9). Thisconfidence in meeting the Olympic deadlines would not have existed without the Olympic legislation.

Deadlines are a distinguishing feature of hallmark events, as noted in Aim 2(b). However, the sameaccusations of poor openness, accountability and community participation, as the result of changes toplanning processes, have been made of entrepreneurial governance generally (Cochrane et al., 1996:1333; lmrie and Thomas, 1995: 480). Social capital will be seriously damaged if governments anddevelopers continue to take entrepreneurial approaches which undermine democratic principles.

5.3 ENTREPRENEURIAL OLYMPIC PLANNING

The planning processes for the Sydney 2000 Olympics exhibited many of the features which are recognisedas being universally salient in entrepreneurial systems of governance. The impacts of the Olympic planningprocesses were analogous to the impacts of entrepreneurial policies, particularly in respect of: therestructuring of inter-government relations; the restructuring of public sector relations with the privatesector; and the relaxation of planning processes, resulting in reduced openness, accountability and publicparticipation. These entrepreneurial features were most noticeable in the approach of NSW governmentagencies to planning. Local governments however exhibited very diverse responses to entrepreneurialprocesses, in relation to both planning for the Olympics and governance in general (Aim 3(b)). The practicesof RCC certainly support the proposition that entrepreneurialism is a dominant ideology in all levels ofgovernment in Australia. The cases of both WAVC and AUBC however strongly contradict this generalisation,demonstrating that managerial and democratic concerns remain extremely important in some localgovernment areas.


CHAPTER 6: CHALLENGING ENTREPRENEURIALISMIn their feminist critique of political economy, Gibson and Graham (publishing as Gibson-Graham, 1996)referred to the discourse of globalisation as ‘a tightly scripted narrative of differential power’ (1996:120). In this script, upon which much of the literature on globalisation is based, capitalism, multinationalcorporations and global competition are conceived of as the dominant forces in contemporary times.Gibson-Graham have however challenged this globalisation script, suggesting that the discourse ofglobalisation is more powerful than the actual practices of globalisation. In the last two decades, anurban version of the globalisation script has been written; the discourse of entrepreneurialism. In thisnew script, globalisation is seen by many as a primary factor in the transition from urban managerialismto entrepreneurialism, which has tended to be presented as ‘a universal response to a universallysimilar set of problems’ (section 2.1; Hall, 1998: 103).

The previous two chapters have discussed urban governance in Sydney, Australia, with referencespecifically to the planning processes for the spectacle of the Sydney Olympics. Chapter 5 in particularhighlighted the consistency between the processes and impacts of this hallmark event and thecharacteristics of entrepreneurialism, as they are presented in the entrepreneurialism script. Thedominance of entrepreneurial urban governance and the assumptions and generalisations of theentrepreneurialism script can, however, be challenged. This chapter questions some of these assumptionsthrough an examination of local government and local community resistance to entrepreneurialist urbangovernance, addressing, in particular, the third aim of the study.

6.1 LOCAL GOVERNMENT RESISTANCE

The rhetoric of entrepreneurialism suggests that the policies of urban governments are driven by theneed to achieve global competitiveness and economic growth. The NSW Government is seen asdemonstrating this approach to urban governance with its increasing use of private sector developmentcoalitions, special planning legislation, and the removal of planning powers from local government (seeChapter 5). However, the dominance of this philosophy needs to be questioned. Social welfare hasbeen, and will always be a concern to the people whom governments are elected to represent. AsMurphy and Wu (1999) argued, managerialist concerns have not been obliterated. Rather,entrepreneurialist concerns have added to the complexity of governance, although at the state andfederal level in Australia entrepreneurial concerns may be prioritised. Managerial and democratic concernshave nevertheless continued to operate beneath the ascendant entrepreneurialism. With the increasingrealisation of the need for ecologically sustainable development, including the need for higher qualitiesof life and equity, it is likely that these concerns may become ever more salient. In the present study, theapproach of three LGAs to planning for the Olympics, and to urban governance in general, was examinedwith reference to the entrepreneurialism script. The results clearly show that there are significantdifferences in the approach of local councils to urban governance in Sydney. Entrepreneurialism is notthe hegemonic ideology that many urban geographers would have us believe, and local action isfundamental in resisting entrepreneurial policies.

RCC, the first LGA studied, appeared to fit the entrepreneurialism script almost perfectly. In planning theRyde Aquatic Leisure Centre (RALC), both before and after it was selected as an Olympic venue, theCouncil exhibited a very entrepreneurialist approach, which is also evident in their approach to planning ingeneral. Public-private partnerships, low public accountability and numerous instances of alienation ofcommunity land all suggest that economic growth and efficiency have overwhelmed the traditional goalsof local government of welfare and municipal services provision. Further, although the Council did conductcommunity consultation in relation to the RALC, this consultation appeared to be quite tokenistic, onceagain supporting the view that entrepreneurialism has become a dominant ethos in Ryde.

WAVC however provided an interesting challenge to the entrepreneurial script. The Council vehementlyopposed being a venue for the world’s largest hallmark event and displayed strong commitment to


meaningful and prolonged community participation and consultation. Further, the privatisation ofcommunity resources is a strategy that WAVC does not endorse, and they have a clear commitment toproviding services and housing for residents of all socio-economic groups. Waverley LGA thus clearlydemonstrates that the principles of managerialism and democracy have not been entirely subsumed bythe rise of entrepreneurial governance.

AUBC also challenged the entrepreneurial script, although this is a Council area in which the directionof urban governance is still evolving. At present, managerial concerns appear to be most important toAUBC, which is not altogether surprising given that it is an LGA of significant socio-economic disadvantage,with a population that is heavily reliant on the welfare services provided by governments. Democraticconcerns of public involvement are important, but difficult to fulfil due to language barriers and thecosts of conducting proper consultation. The Olympics has however provided an impetus for AUBC tomove in an entrepreneurial direction, with the Sydney Olympic Park providing an almost incomparablemarketing opportunity for the LGA (Aim 4). For such an under-resourced Council, the opportunity toattract investment had to be exploited. Whether entrepreneurialist policies will become dominant, orwhether they will be successfully integrated with managerial and democratic concerns may becomeknown over the next decade.

There is thus considerable variation in local government responses to the ascendancy ofentrepreneurialism in urban governance. In spite of a State Government whose policies appear to beincreasingly driven by entrepreneurial and global concerns, local governments have proven, in someinstances, that managerialism and democracy are still important philosophies in urban politics.Furthermore, the results of this study indicate how the inherent characteristics of local areas are salientin determining the varying levels of entrepreneurialism, managerialism and democracy displayed inlocal governance (Aim 2(a)). For example, the Waverley LGA is quite unique in its resources (for example,Australia’s most famous beach), location (only 7 kilometres east of the Sydney CBD), and establishedreputation (what could be described as a tourist Mecca). Auburn LGA was an industrial area in Sydney’swestern suburbs, with few tourist attractions. Waverleys features quite possibly make it unusual, allowingWAVC to resist entrepreneurial policies, yet maintain a high quality of life.

6.2 COMMUNITY RESISTANCE

In the globalisation script, individuals or particular groups of people, as well as institutions, are typicallyassigned a particular role, often that of the disempowered victim. Gibson-Graham, however, point outinstances in which this script has been challenged, how individuals and communities can in fact eitheroppose the forces of globalisation directly (1996: 129), or use the changes induced by globalisation forempowerment or to improve social relations (1996: 131-132, 142). In the entrepreneurialism script,local communities are similarly ascribed a victim role. It is typically assumed, and unfortunately all toooften demonstrated, that public participation in the formulation of planning policies is limited, thatcommunity resources are alienated from public ownership or control, and that social capital is destroyedthrough reduced faith in planning instruments and civil governance generally. These assumptions arehowever encouragingly troubled by this research, in which local communities show that significantbenefits can be derived when the passive victim role is rejected. This section also discusses howcommunities are vital in resisting entrepreneurialism, with its negative impacts on democratic principlesand socio-economic equity.

6.2.1 Achieving community goals

In a study of Glasgow’s role as European City of Culture in 1990, Boyle argued that hallmark events canprovide communities with an empowering opportunity to realise their pre-existing goals and promotetheir own agendas. For example, Glasgow Sculpture Studios was able to secure around 4,000 poundsfrom the City of Culture organisers to promote their existing goal of increasing the total number of localcommissions of sculptures (1997: 1991). Boyle’s argument is supported in the Waverley


and Ryde LGAs. These areas were able to use the Olympics to achieve pre-existing goals, although thismay not always be to the overall benefit of the community.

In Waverley, the Council negotiated from the Olympic organisers a legacy for the community whichincluded substantial improvements to the Bondi Pavilion. Some of these improvements were alreadyplanned and, as the Mayor commented, ‘[w]e’ve effectively been able to bring forward aspects of ourfive-year restoration plan of the Pavilion, forward by about 18 months’ (Int #6: 24). WAVC and thecommunity thus took advantage of the Olympics such that planning goals will be achieved sooner, withthe Olympic authorities bearing the cost.

A different example is provided in Ryde, where RCC had been planning the redevelopment of the RSCsince 1991. Hosting an Olympic venue meant that RCC could secure millions of dollars for a new centre,access Olympic standard design and construction expertise, and gain the marketing advantage ofinvolvement in the Sydney 2000 Olympics. As a RCC representative pointed out, ‘an Olympic opportunityis quite a good opportunity to get the facilities and services that you want’ (Int. #1: 15). Achieving this pre-existing goal through involvement in the Olympics may not however have been to the overall benefit ofthe community. For example, some members of the community consider that the Olympic planningprocesses were used as a cunning manoeuvre through which the Council has promoted their agenda ofleasing the Centre to a private operator. The events in Ryde thus demonstrate how involvement in hallmarkevents enable councils and communities to achieve pre-existing goals. However, in some circumstances,depending on the goals involved, such involvement may serve to exacerbate and legitimise the processesand negative social impacts of entrepreneurialism and hallmark events.

6.2.2 Community empowerment

Case studies on hallmark events and on entrepreneurialism in urban politics tend to focus on thedisempowerment and marginalisation of communities that result from the new institutions and planningprocesses in urban governance. A challenge to the entrepreneurialism script is the argument that hallmarkevents provide a focus for united local community opposition to a transition to urban entrepreneurialism(Boyle, 1997; Boyle and Hughes, 1994). Waitt (1999) concluded from his research on the expressedlevels of enthusiasm for the 2000 Olympics that there was no evidence that this hallmark event hasacted in such a way as to unite communities against the actions of an entrepreneurial state government.One of the most valuable findings of this research however is that communities are not, and need notbe disempowered under entrepreneurial regimes and through hallmark events. Communities canchallenge the regimes imposed upon them and achieve significant benefits for themselves in so doing.In this study of three LGAs, local communities and councils challenged both the impacts of hallmarkevents, as they applied specifically to their local area, and the move towards entrepreneurialism bygovernments in general.

The residents of Waverley proved that communities need not be disempowered, nor their interestsmarginalised in hallmark event planning. This vociferous community, with support from their Council,defied the Olympic organisers and very publicly demanded that their rights be respected. They publiclycriticised the lack of information provided by the OCA, the alienation of important community facilities,and the construction of such a massive structure on Australia’s most famous beach. The community wasnot able to prevent the development taking place but their opposition resulted in changes to the designof the stadium and significantly enhanced the Council’s ability to negotiate a substantial legacy for thecommunity (Int. #6: 14; Int. #7: 9). Although the community did not manage to have the beach volleyballmoved to an alternative location, the events in Waverley nonetheless proved that social capital can beenhanced through united community opposition and hence, community empowerment. For example,the OCA was forced to be more open and accountable to the community, and was compelled to offera substantial material local legacy. Two conclusions can be derived from this example of communityempowerment in hallmark event planning.

First, the perspective and resolve of local councils is extremely important in determining the success


of community opposition. In Waverley, it was the Council that refused to comply completely with theOCA’s strict confidentiality requirements and that insisted on keeping the community properly informedof the status of negotiations. WAVC also provided financial support and publicity for the resident actiongroup, Bondi Olympic Watch (BOW). In Ryde however, vocal community opposition to the planningprocesses for the RALC was nowhere near as successful as the Waverley community opposition. It istrue that there were considerably fewer community members voicing their opposition than in Waverley,and this could simply be because not as many people were opposed to the development. However, theRyde Pool Action Croup (RPAG) did not have the avenues of publicity and financial support from Councilthat BOW had access to. If the RALC had been a purely Olympic development and RCC had supportedthe community’s opposition, it is feasible that the RPAG could have mobilised the community moreeffectively and more opposition would have been voiced.

The different successes of community opposition in Ryde and Waverley suggest that in areas wherelocal councils support the entrepreneurial objectives of central government, or are themselves in supportof a particular hallmark event, community opposition will be less successful. Of course, the opinions ofthe community also impact on local councils through elections and other democratic mechanisms oflocal government. The level of local government support for entrepreneurial policies or hallmark eventsmay thus be determined by the extent of community opposition.

The second conclusion poses a sobering threat to community empowerment in the context of anascendant entrepreneurialism. The Waverley community action demonstrated that local communitiescan be empowered and unite against hallmark event developments to enhance community legacies.However, only certain communities are able to form effective resident action groups, these typicallybeing the well-resourced, educated, higher socio-economic communities (Gleeson and Wolch, 1989;Jakubowicz, 1974; Ley, 1980). Thus, lower socio-economic communities may be less able to mobiliseresistance within entrepreneurialism. It is however these communities that are most likely to sufferunder entrepreneurialist regimes which redirect expenditure away from welfare programs and enhancesocio-economic differences (Boyle, 1997: 1978). An example of this outcome is provided by Auburn, acommunity of significant socio-economic disadvantage. The Auburn communities are receiving anextraordinary legacy in the physical infrastructure in Sydney Olympic Park However, the direct benefit tothe Auburn community is likely to be minimal, with limited community access to some facilities and asignificant financial loss for the LGA for a time. Council staff did express differing views on how effectivecommunity opposition, of which there was none, would have been in securing a greater legacy for thecommunity. However, it was commented several times that the OCA and State Government wouldprobably have been much more sympathetic to Auburn Council’s concerns if there had been a vocaldissatisfied community (Int. #9: 8; Int. #10: 8). Such opinions suggest that in disadvantaged areas,there is a particular onus upon councils to ensure that communities are properly informed and involvedand that the negative impacts of hallmark events are minimised.

Community opposition and empowerment in the planning of the Sydney Olympics also suggests thathallmark events can provide a focus around which local communities can oppose the ascendancy ofurban entrepreneurialism. The opposition in Waverley was centred on the impacts and processes of theplanning of an Olympic venue. However, concerns were also raised about the potential privatisation of theBondi Pavilion. The Waverley community and Council are vigorously opposed to any such entrepreneurialprivatisation. The results of the NSW local government elections in September 1999 also suggest thatcommunities are uniting in opposition to state government entrepreneurial policies, with the election ofmany anti-privatisation and anti-development councillors. In some LGAs, the Olympics provided the impetusfor such changes to local councils. In Ryde for example, several councillors aligned with Councillor IvanPetch, who campaigned very strongly against the entrepreneurial processes and outcomes relating to theOlympics and RALC, were elected to office. In Waverley, many of the Greens councillors, who alsocampaigned against the processes of the Council and state government in relation to the Olympics, werealso elected. Quite obviously, there is community displeasure not only with Olympic processes specifically,but also the entrepreneurialism with which they are associated.


6.2.3 Summary

This research has shown that the typical assumptions of the entrepreneurialism script of communitydisempowerment and silencing of dissent are not universally appropriate. Indeed some communitieshave succeeded in challenging hallmark events and the hegemony of entrepreneurialism. In relation tohallmark events especially, the public-private coalitions organising festivals and other entrepreneurialdevelopments are acutely sensitive about vocal community opposition adversely affecting the promotionof these events. Communities can thus secure a greater legacy by opposing undemocratic andinconsiderate entrepreneurialist processes. However, specific local factors will in part determine thesuccess of community opposition. For example, in Waverley, the Olympic organisers had becomecommitted to holding the beach volleyball at Bondi, and it was deemed politically necessary to obtainthe consent of WAVC as the official representatives of the Waverley community. Bondi could also bepromoted as a national icon which should not be desecrated by an unsightly stadium. In Ryde, however,the RSC was only a local ‘icon’, for which it was harder to rally support and succeed in resisting theOlympic processes.

6.3 RESISTING ENTREPRENEURIALISM

The local instances of opposition discovered in this research show that the rhetoric of entrepreneurialismis not hegemonic. Rather, there is considerable spatial unevenness in both the extent of entrepreneurialismin urban governance and in its local impacts (Aim 3). In some cases, both local governments andcommunities in Sydney are resisting the ascendancy of urban entrepreneurialism which has been evidentin the NSW Government’s approach to urban governance. The different approaches of the councils ofRyde, Waverley and Auburn demonstrate that the principles of managerialism and democracy remainimportant in at least some local areas. Communities can also be empowered through hallmark eventsby achieving pre-existing goals. Their resistance, combined with that of local governments, toentrepreneurial policies is extremely important in securing beneficial community legacies. This findingis however tempered by the political reality that some communities are less able to mobilise effectiveresident activism.


7.1 THE LOCAL IMPACTS OF THE SYDNEY 2000 OLYMPICS

CHAPTER 7: CONCLUSION

The results of this study on the planning of the Sydney 2000 Olympic Games demonstrate that there isconsiderable local variation in the physical, economic, social and political impacts of a hallmark event Thegreatest variation in the impacts of the Olympics in the Ryde, Waverley and Auburn LGAs was in the socialand political impacts, which were overshadowed by a focus on the more positive physical and symboliclegacies of hosting the Games. The negative social impacts resulted from the lack of meaningful communityparticipation in the planning of the Games, the lack of openness and accountability of Olympic organisingauthorities, and the restriction of public access to community facilities. The political impacts included theremoval of local government planning powers and the catalysis for administrative change within localgovernment. For Ryde City Council, Olympic involvement could have reinforced a transition towardsentrepreneurial governance, however local community opposition may have slowed or hindered such atransition. At Waverley Council, Olympic involvement caused the managerial and democratic concerns ofthe local government to be reinforced, in preference to entrepreneurial concerns. For Auburn Council, theOlympics provided an opportunity for a more entrepreneurial approach to urban governance, with newinternational-standard sporting facilities which can be marketed to attract investment to the area. However,Auburn Council clearly continues to acknowledge the importance of maintaining the welfare of all residents,thus indicating the strong managerial concerns of the Council.

7.2 LOCAL GOVERNMENT ENTREPRENEURIALISM

The Sydney Olympics provided an excellent means by which to examine the nature of hallmark eventplanning in general and the nature of urban governance in Sydney. The results show that many of thecharacteristic features of entrepreneurial urban governance are manifest in Sydney. However, there arealso encouraging departures from the typically assumed processes and impacts of entrepreneurialism.There are six key conclusions that can be made from this study.

First, the planning and impacts of the Sydney Olympics were analogous to the characteristics ofentrepreneurial governance. Features supporting this conclusion were: the centralisation of planningpowers; the high level of involvement of the private sector; the relaxation and streamlining of planningprocesses; and the subversion of the democratic principles of openness, accountability, and communityparticipation in planning.

Second, a principal justification for the Olympic Games planning processes was the deadline to whichthe event is subject. The massive scale of the Olympics preparation and the need for certainty in beingable to meet the deadline were used to argue that the event could not have been planned undernormal processes. An issue to be addressed by researchers, governments and communities is the extentto which the subversion of democratic principles in the planning of hallmark events is justified by strictevent deadlines and the potential benefits of the event.

Third, the negative impacts of the Olympics planning processes are a cause for concern as the NSWGovernment increasingly adopts an entrepreneurial approach to urban governance. The prioritisation ofeconomic growth over welfare and democratic concerns, evident in both the planning of the SydneyOlympics and entrepreneurial systems of governance elsewhere, may have long term detrimental effectssuch as socio-economic polarisation and a systemic loss of social capital. It is important that the NSWGovernment is aware of, and develops mechanisms to mitigate these potential impacts ofentrepreneurialism in urban governance.

Fourth, local governments have exhibited a variety of responses to the rhetoric of entrepreneurialismand to central government’s entrepreneurial planning policies for the Olympics. Entrepreneurialism ishowever not a dominant ideology throughout local government. Rather, some local governments


have resisted the ascendancy of entrepreneurialism and continue to prioritise managerial and democraticconcerns. Such resistance was evident in the responses of some local councils to the NSW Government’sentrepreneurial Olympic planning processes.

Fifth, local communities can be empowered, and their interests championed, not marginalised in hallmarkevent planning or entrepreneurial governance. Local communities used the Olympic Games to achievepre-existing goals and improve local areas. Local communities in some areas of Sydney have also resistedboth the impacts and processes of entrepreneurialism, as manifest in the planning of the 2000 Olympicsand in urban governance in general.

Sixth, the spatial variation in entrepreneurialism is dependent on the unique characteristics of localareas. These characteristics include, for example, the attitude of local councils to urban governance, thesocio-economic and physical characteristics of areas, and the ability of communities to mobilise effectiveresident activism.

In conclusion, it is apparent that the Sydney Games have had and will continue to have numerouspositive and negative impacts on local communities. It is hoped that the community and local governmentscrutiny of, and opposition to, the planning processes of the Olympics have demonstrated that for futurehallmark events or entrepreneurialist developments, the public should be afforded the transparencyand accountability it rightly deserves from those charting the future urban environment.


APPENDIX 1: GENERIC INTERVIEW SCHEDULE

Interview Schedule – RCC

1. Firstly, could you give me the recent history of the Ryde pool redevelopment, from Council’sperspective

2.

3.

when did you first speak with OCA about Ryde pool being an Olympic venue?

Why did Council decide to bid to host the second Olympic water polo venue?

secure funding for a positive legacy; prestige/hype associated with Olympics;encouraged by the State Government to bid?

What are the benefits of the Aquatic Centre to the Ryde community and will there be long-term economic benefits?

4. In terms of your relationship with OCA, what parameters were established early on?

e.g. insist on special institutional arrangements, restrictions on who could talk to themedia or the community, liaison officers

5. In an information sheet released in April 1998, Council wrote that they would ‘work inpartnership with the OCA’. Has this happened and how would you describe your relationshipwith the OCA?

what degree of consultation has there been between this council and the StateGovernment /OCA?

6.

has information requested by the Council been forthcoming?

Council represented on many Olympic-related committees?

Do you think the Leisure Centre will be important in enhancing the profile of Ryde?

encourage more people, from different parts of Sydney, to come to Ryde; was this animportant consideration in the selection of the appropriate development or anadditional bonus?

7. In the Public Hearing Report, 2 key findings were that Council seek to reclassify some landas ‘community’, and that a community consultation protocol be prepared. Have either ofthese occurred?

8. Has planning the Leisure Centre, and paying for it, affected other Council services or programsin any way?

what about claims that funding to your bush regeneration program has been reduced?

9. To the best of your understanding, was Council or OCA responsible for the communityconsultation for this redevelopment?

how was this agreed / established

10. What community consultation did Council undertake in relation to the Ryde pooldevelopment?


at what stage of the process did consultation occur; meaningful?

how has consultation differed from normal processes since OCA became involved?

if this development was not an Olympic Games development, would you considerthe consultation that has been conducted adequate

why is an Olympic Games development so special?

role of deadlines

11.

12.

13.

14.

15.

16.

17.

18.

How did you feel about the confidentiality agreement you signed with OCA?

How do you feel about groups such as the RPAG - are they just a noisy minority or do theygenuinely represent community opinion?

A lot of people, including members of RPAG, have said that many people will not be able toafford entry to the Leisure Centre. How does Council respond to that?

are community facilities better owned by private interests rather than the public sector

Has the Ryde pool development and the Olympics changed Council’s approach to planningor to the community?

will consultation be conducted differently

will decision-making be more or less transparent to the community?

How important is community consultation for local government planning, and what are theconstraints on Council in broadening that consultation?

Do you think that changes to State and Federal Government policies have forced localgovernments, such as Ryde Council, to become more pro-development?

policies e.g. revenue pegging, IDA amendments

greater privatisation; less concerned with social services, more focus on economicbenefit; less public consultation

what effect is this having, or will this have, on the community

e.g. public facilities less accessible / higher quality services?

What do you think are the costs of being an Olympic partner, of hosting Olympic events andbeing subject to Olympic-specific planning and political processes?

loss of local government control of local developments

community distrust of councils

Any concluding comments on the legacy of the Sydney Olympics for the Ryde community oron planning practices in general.


APPENDIX 2: CODING REGIMEQ.S.R. NUD.IST Power version, revision 3.0.4d GUI.

Licensee: Geography.

PROJECT: HONOURS, User Kristy, 9:15 pm, Oct 31, 1999.

(1)

(1 1)

(1 1 1)

(1 1 1 1)

(1 1 2)

(1 1 3)

(1 1 3 1)

(1 2)

(1 2 1)

(1 2 2)

(1 3)

(1 3 1)

(1 3 2)

(1 3 3)

(1 3 4)

(1 4)

(1 4 1)

(1 4 2)

(1 4 3)

(1 4 4)

(1 5)

(1 5 1)

/Entrepreneurialism

/Entrepreneurialism/Centralisation of decision-making

/Entrepreneurialism/Centralisation of decision-making/Marginalisation of localgovernment

/Entrepreneurialism/Centralisation of decision-making/Marginalisation of localgovernment/Local govt. priorities imposed by higher levels of government

/Entrepreneurialism/Centralisation of decision-making/Decreased public accountability

/Entrepreneurialism/Centralisation of decision-making/New legislation

/Entrepreneurialism/Centralisation of decision-making/New legislation/Reducedcommunity input

/Entrepreneurialism/Private agency developers

/Entrepreneurialism/Private agency developers/Low public accountability and scrutiny

/Entrepreneurialism/Private agency developers/Public risk

/Entrepreneurialism/Privatisation of community services and facilities

/Entrepreneurialism/Privatisation of community services and facilities/Higher quality

/Entrepreneurialism/Privatisation of community services and facilities/Reduced accessfor community

/Entrepreneurialism/Privatisation of community services and facilities/Innovation infunding opportunities

/Entrepreneurialism/Privatisation of community services and facilities/Loss of communityownership

/Entrepreneurialism/Less community consultation

/Entrepreneurialism/Less community consultation/Tokenistic

/Entrepreneurialism/Less community consultation/Limits to extensive representation

/Entrepreneurialism/Less community consuItation/Disempowerment of marginalisedgroups

/Entrepreneurialism/Less community consultation/Threat to social capital

/Entrepreneurialism/Local Government

/Entrepreneurialism/Local Government/Seeking economic gain


(1 5 2)

(2)

(2 1)

(2 1 1)

(2 2)

(2 2 1)

(2 3)

(2 4)

(3)

(3 1)

(3 1 1)

(3 1 1 1)

(3 1 1 2)

(3 1 1 3)

(3 1 2)

(3 1 3)

(3 1 4)

(3 1 4 1)

(3 1 4 2)

(3 1 5)

(3 1 6)

(3 2)

(3 2 1)

(3 3)

(3 3 1)

(3 4)

(3 4 1)

/Entrepreneurialism/Local Government/Unaccountable processes & discourage dissent

/Managerialism

/Managerialism/Enhanced community consultation

/Managerialism/Enhanced community consultation/Social benefits

/Managerialism/Community’s best interest; widest benefit

/Managerialism/Community’s best interest; widest benefit/Value for ratepayers’ money

/Managerialism/lnnovation in management

/Managerialism/High government accountability

/Hallmark events

/Hallmark events/Special Planning Agencies

/Hallmark events/Special Planning Agencies/Exemptions from normal planningrequirements

/Hallmark events/Special Planning Agencies/Exemptions from normal planningrequirements/Deadlines necessitate exemptions

/Hallmark events/Special Planning Agencies/Exemptions from normal planningrequirements/Streamlined approvals

/Hallmark events/Special Planning Agencies/Exemptions from normal planningrequirements/Developer incentives

/Hallmark events/Special Planning Agencies/Regional, not local, perspective

/Hallmark events/Special Planning Agencies/Tokenistic community consultation

/Hallmark events/Special Planning Agencies/Decreased openness & public accountability

/Hallmark events/Special Planning Agencies/Decreased openness & public accountability/Inadequate provision of information

/Hallmark events/Special Planning Agencies/Decreased openness & public accountability/Strict confidentiality provisions

/Hallmark events/Special Planning Agencies/Public acceptance of risk

/Hallmark events/Special Planning Agencies/Cost no obstacle

/Hallmark events/Further local govt. or community agendas

/Hallmark events/Further local govt. or community agendas/Enhanced negotiating powerwith community opposition

/Hallmark events/Feel-good discourse & place marketing

/Hallmark events/Feel-good discourse & place marketing /Manufactured consent

/Hallmark events/Permanent administrative change

/Hallmark events/Permanent administrative change/Increased privatisation


(3 4 2)

(4)

(4 1)

(4 1 1)

(4 1 2)

(4 1 3)

(4 1 4)

(4 1 5)

(4 2)

/Hallmark events/Permanent administrative change/New legislation & relaxation ofplanning requirements

/Olympic Legacy

/Olympic Legacy/Local

/Olympic Legacy/Local/Political

/Olympic Legacy/Local/Physical

/Olympic Legacy/Local/Economic

/Olympic Legacy/Local/Social

/Olympic Legacy/Local/Symbolic

/Olympic Legacy/Regional


REFERENCESAlbany Consulting Group (1997) Social Capital in the Olympic City, Green Games Watch 2000 Inc., Sydney.

Anderson, J. (1990) ‘The “new right”, enterprise zones and urban development corporations’, lnternationalJournal of Urban and Regional Research, 14, 468-489.

Auburn Council (1998a) Auburn Council Social Plan, Auburn Council, Sydney.

Auburn Council (1998b) Auburn Council - Olympic Co-ordination Unit Charter.

Auburn Council (1998c) Proposal: Assessment of Financial Impact of Homebush Bay Development &Olympics/Paralympics, 27 March 1998, Auburn Council, Sydney.

Auburn Council (1999) ‘Impact of the Olympic Games’, Briefing Notes for NSW Party Leaders, Ministers,Shadow Ministers and Candidates.

Auditor-General (1999) ‘Executive Summary’, The Sydney 2000 Olympic and Paralympic Games: Review ofEstimates, http://www.audit.nsw.gov.au/ olympics99/execsum.htm, 26/04/99.

Baxter, J. and Eyles, J. (1997) ‘Evaluating qualitative research in social geography: establishing ‘rigour’ ininterview analysis’, Transactions, Institute of British Geographers, NS 22, 505-525.

Bell, A. (1998) Public Participation in Local Government, Sydney, B.Sc. Honours thesis, School of Geography,The University of New South Wales.

Boyle, M. (1997) ‘Civic boosterism in the politics of local economic development - “institutional positions”and “strategic orientations” in the consumption of hallmark events”‘, Environment and Planning A, 29,1975-1997.

Boyle, M. and Hughes, G. (1994) The politics of urban entrepreneurialism in Glasgow’, Geoforum, 25, 4, 453-470.

Brus, G. (1998) General Manager’s Report No. 13/98, 17 July 1998, Ryde City Council, Sydney.

Cashman, R. (1999) ‘Is there a place for the community in a more globalised Games? The community and theSydney Games’, Abstract and presentation for ’The Olympics in the Next Millennium: Centre forOlympic Studies Conference, 22-23 September, University of New South Wales, Australia.

Charlesworth, J. and Cochrane, A. (1994) ‘Tales of the suburbs: the local politics of growth in the south-east ofEngland’, Urban Studies, 31, 10, 1723-1738.

Clive Lucas, Stapleton & Partners (1997) Bondi Pavilion, Surf Club & Surrounds Conservation Analysis andConservation Guidelines, prepared for Waverley Council.

Cochrane, A., Peck, J. and Tickell, A. (1996) ‘Manchester plays games: exploring the local politics ofglobalisation’, Urban Studies, 33, 8, 1319-1336.

Cox, K.R. (1993) ‘The local and the global in the new urban politics: a critical view’, Environment and PlanningD: Society and Space, 11, 433-48.

Day, M. (1999) ‘Brats of Bondi win gold for selfishness’, The Daily Telegraph, 21 April, 11.

Department of Planning (1991) Modernising the Planning System in NSW, Department of Planning, Sydney.

Department of Urban Affairs and Planning (1997) Integrated Development Assessment: White Paper andExposure Draft Bill; Environmental Planning and Assessment Amendment Bill 1997, Department ofUrban Affairs and Planning, Sydney.

Dunn, K. (1998) The Olympics locally: learning the lessons from economic globalisation’, in Cashman, R. andHughes, A. (eds), Mosman Council - Forum on the Impacts of the Olympics: 24 October 1997, TheCentre for Olympic Studies, The University of New South Wales, 26-35.

Dunn, K.M. (1999) ‘Interviewing’, in Hay, I. Qualitative Methods in Human Geography, Oxford University Press,Sydney, Chapter 4.

Dunn, K.M. and McGuirk, P.M. (1999) ‘Hallmark events, in Cashman, R. and Hughes, A. (eds), Staging theOlympics: The Event and its Impact, UNSW Press, Sydney, 18-32.

Edwards, L. (1999) ‘Privatisation “spawns bureaucracy’“, The Sydney Morning Herald, 16 September, 4.

Evans, M. (1999) ’Tide turns for Bondi protest’, The Sydney Morning Herald, 6 August, 10.

French, S.P. and Disher, M.E. (1997) ‘Atlanta and the Olympics: A one-year retrospective’, Journal of theAmerican Planning Association, 63, 3, Summer, 379-392.


Gibson-Graham, J.K. (1996) ‘Querying Globalization’, in Gibson-Graham, J.K. The End of Capitalism (as weknew it): A Feminist Critique of Political Economy, Blackwell Publishers, Oxford.

Gleeson, B.J. and Welch, J.R. (1989) ‘Homelessness and the politics of turf: the case of Venice, California’,Working Paper 17, The Los Angeles Homelessness Project, University of Southern California, LosAngeles.

Green Games Watch (1997) Newsletter, Green Games Watch 2000 Inc., Sydney, Issue 5, Autumn/Winter.

Hall, T. (1998) ‘Introduction’, in Hall, T. and Hubbard, P. (eds) The Entrepreneurial City: Geographies of Politics,Regime and Representation, John Wiley & Sons, England, 103-106.

Hall, T. and Hubbard, P. (1996) ‘The entrepreneurial city: new urban politics, new urban geographies?‘,Progress in Human Geography, 20, 2, 153-174.

Hall, T. and Hubbard, P. (eds) (1998) The Entrepreneurial City: Geographies of Politics, Regime andRepresentation, John Wiley & Sons, England.

Harvey, D. (1989) ‘From managerialism to entrepreneurialism: the transformation in urban governance in latecapitalism’, Geografiska Annaler, 71B, 3-17.

Hastings, A. (1999) ‘Discourse and urban change: Introduction to the special issue’, Urban Studies, 36, 1, 7-12.

Imrie, R. and Raco, M. (1999) ‘How new is the new local governance? Lessons from the United Kingdom’,Transactions, Institute of British Geographers, 24, 45-63.

Imrie, R. and Thomas, H. (1995) ‘Urban policy processes and the politics of urban regeneration’, InternationalJournal of Urban and Regional Research, 19, 4, 479-94.

Jacobs, J.M. (1999) ’The Labour of Cultural Geography’, Stratford, E. (ed) Australian Cultural Geographies,Oxford University Press, Australia, 11-24.

Jakubowicz, A. (1974) ’The city game: urban ideology and social conflict, or Who gets the goodies and whopays the costs?‘, in Edgar, D.E. (ed) Social Change in Australia: Readings in Sociology, LongmanCheshire, Melbourne, 329-344.

JBA + Berkhout Urban Planning Consultants (1998) Statement of Environmental Effects: Ryde Aquatic LeisureCentre, Incorporating the Second Olympic Water Polo Venue, Victoria Road, Ryde, prepared on behalfof Olympic Co-ordination Authority, JBA + Berkhout Urban Planning Consultants, Sydney.

Jordan, P. (1999) ‘Submission by Ryde City Council to the Public Hearing into Draft Local Environmental PlanNo. 98: in Nangle, J. A Report to Ryde City Council on a Public Hearing held on Friday 2 July 1999 intoa Council Sponsored Draft Local Environmental Plan to Reclassify Olympic Park within the City fromCommunity to Operational Land, Planning Strategies PS Pty Ltd, Sydney, Appendix 5.

Latham, H. (1998) ‘Interview: Call for improved community consultation’, Green Games Watch 2000Newsletter, Issue 8, Winter, 7.

Lee, E. (1999) ‘Aboriginal history of Homebush Bay’, Abstract and presentation for ‘The Olympics in the NextMillennium’, Centre for Olympic Studies Conference, 22-23 September, University of New South Wales,Australia.

Leitner, H. and Garner, M. (1993) The limits of local initiatives: a reassessment of urban entrepreneurialism forurban development’, Urban Geography, 14, 1, 57-77.

Ley, D. (1980) ‘Liberal ideology and the postindustrial city’, Annals of the Association of AmericanGeographers, 70, 2, 238-258.

Ley, D. and Olds, K. (1992) World’s Fairs and the culture of consumption in the contemporary city’, inAnderson, K. and Gale, F. (eds), Inventing Places, Longman Cheshire, Melbourne, 178-93.

McDougall, B. (1999) ‘Beach shifted to make way for volleyball’, The Daily Telegraph, 8 April, 6.

McDowell, L. (1992) ‘Valid Games? A Response to Erica Schoenberger’, Professional Geographer, 44, 2, 212-215.

McGuirk, P.M., Winchester, H.P.M. and Dunn, K.M. (1996) ‘Entrepreneurial approaches to urban decline: theHoneysuckle redevelopment in inner Newcastle, New South Wales’, Environment and Planning A, 28,1815-1841.

McGuirk, P.M., Winchester, H.P.M. and Dunn, K.M. (1998) ‘On losing the local in responding to urban decline: theHoneysuckle redevelopment, New South Wales’, in Hall, T. and Hubbard, P. (eds), The EntrepreneurialCity: Geographies of Politics, Regime and Representation, John Wiley & Sons, England, 107-128.


McLaughlin, A. (1998) ‘Reed cops flak at “Info Meetings’“, The Weekly Times, 18 November, 20.

McMahon, M.C. (1998) Waverley Council: Olympic Update, October, 1998, http://www.waverley.nsw.gov.au/happenin/Olympic/News.htm, 07/09/99.

Moore, M. (1999) ‘Rent-watchers urge legal protection’, The Sydney Morning Herald, 17 September, 14.

Mowbray, M. (1994) Wealth, welfare and the city: developments in Australian urban policy’, Urban Policy andResearch, 12, 2, 91-103.

Murphy, P.A. and Wu, C. (1999) ‘Governing global Sydney: from managerialism to entrepreneurialism’, Urbanand Regional Governance in the Asia Pacific, September, 17-32.

Olympic Co-ordination Authority (1997a) Homebush Bay Site Guide, Olympic Co-ordination Authority, Sydney.

Olympic Co-ordination Authority (1997b) State of Play ‘97: A Report on Sydney 2000 Olympics Planning andConstruction, Olympic Co-ordination Authority, Sydney.

Olympic Co-ordination Authority (1998a) State of Play ‘98 Update: A Report to the People of New SouthWales, Olympic Co-ordination Authority, Sydney.

Olympic Co-ordination Authority (1998b) ‘Consultation over Olympic venue in Waverley’, Media Releases, 4November 1998, http://www.oca.nsw.gov.au/cgi-bin/MR199811041.asp, 18/05/99.

Olympic Co-ordination Authority and Waverley Council (1999) Waverley Council Olympic Master AgreementRelating to Beach Volley Ball and Road Cycling, 2 August 1999.

Olympic Co-ordination Authority Ecology Programs (1999) Ecology Green Sheet: From Wastelands toWetlands, Olympic Co-ordination Authority Ecology Programs, Sydney.

Pain, N. (1989) ‘Third party rights: public participation under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act1979 (N.S.W.): do the floodgates need opening or closing?‘, Environmental and PIanning Law Journal,6, 1, March, 26-35.

Phibbs, P. and Cox, C. (1994) ‘User pays cities’, in Gibson, K. and Watson, S. (eds), Metropolis Now: PIanningand the Urban in Contemporary Australia, Pluto Press, Australia, 161-170.

Pickvance, C. and Preteceille, E. (1991) State Restructuring and Local Power: A Comparative Perspective,Pinter, London.

Pusey, M. (1991) Economic Rationalism in Canberra: A Nation-Building State Changes its Mind, CambridgeUniversity Press, Melbourne.

Putnam, R.D. (1994) ‘What makes democracy work?, IPA Review, 47, 1, 31-34.

Reserve Bank of Australia (1999) Semi-Annual Statement on Monetary Policy, May 1999.

Richmond, D. (1999) ‘The State of New South Wales’, Paper prepared for ’The Politics of the Olympics;Australasian Political Studies Association Conference, 27 September, University of Sydney, Australia.

Robinson, D. (1993) ‘Public participation in environmental decision-making’, Environmental and Planning LawJournal, 10, 5, October, 320-340.

Robinson, F. and Shaw, K. (1991) ‘Urban regeneration and community involvement’, Local Economy, 6, 61-71.

Ryan, C. (1999) ‘British Model used for new leisure centres’, Business Review Weekly, February 8, 72.

Ryde City Council (1998) ‘Olympic win creates world-class leisure centre; Ryde City Council Information Sheet,April 1998.

Ryde City Council (1999) Ryde City News, June.

Rydin, Y, (1998) The enabling local state and urban development: resources, rhetoric and planning in EastLondon’, Urban Studies, 35, 2, 175-191.

SA Smits & Associates Pty Ltd (1999) Statement of Environmental Effects for Olympic Beach VolleyballTemporary Facilities, Bondi Beach, prepared for Olympic Co-ordination Authority, SA Smits & AssociatesPty Ltd, Sydney.

Sant, M. and Jackson, S. (1991) ‘Strategic planning and urban restructuring: the case of Pyrmont-Ultimo’,Australian Geographer, 22, 2, November, 136.

Sproats, K. (1997) ‘Local government and the Sydney 2000 Olympic Games’, Urban Futures, 22, June, 37-40.

Waitt, G. (1999) ‘Playing Games with Sydney: Marketing Sydney for the 2000 Olympics’, Urban Studies, 36, 7,1055-1078.


Waitt, G. and Furrier, P. (1999) ‘Sharing the Spirit? Socio-spatial polarisation and expressed enthusiasm for theOlympic Games’, Pacific Tourism Review, 4, 1, in press.

Walsh, R. (1993) ‘Entrepreneurialism in local government’, Local Government Management, 27, 2, October, 12-14, 16.

Ward, K.G. (1997) ‘Coalitions in urban regeneration: a regime approach’, Environment and Planning A, 29,1493-1506.

Wilkinson, J. (1997) ‘Olympic volleyball at Bondi’, The Messenger, 12 August, 10.

Winter, I. and Brook, T. (1993) ‘Urban planning and the entrepreneurial state: the view from Victoria, Australia’,Environment and Planning C, 11, 263-78.


ACKNOWLEDGEMENTSI would like to extend my sincere appreciation and gratitude to my supervisor, Dr Kevin Dunn,for his invaluable guidance and encouragement in this research. My thanks Kevin, for yourenthusiasm, support and advice on this challenging project. I would like to thank also myfather, Dennis Owen, for his constructive comments and advice throughout the research.Sincere thanks also to Michael O’Neil, for his comments on drafts of the research paper, AlanJenner, for helping prepare the map, and to all the organisations and people, especially theinformants, who provided me with the information for this project finally, I thank my familyand friends for their support and encouragement during this research.

Kristy Ann Owen

Biography: Kristy Owen

Kristy Owen completed the Higher School Certificate in 1995, and in 1996 shecommenced a Science/Law degree at The University of New South Wales. Kristycompleted her Science degree, with a Geography major, in 1999, deferring her legalstudies for a year in order to undertake Honours in Geography. During this Honoursyear Kristy completed an individual thesis on the topical subject of The Sydney 2000Olympics and Urban Entrepreneurialism: Local Variations in Urban Governance. Thisthesis provided the basis for this monograph paper. These pieces of researchcontributed to Kristy being awarded First Class Honours and a University Medal inGeography. Kristy is now completing her Law degree, spending her last semester atMcGill University, in Montreal, Canada.


Documents

monograph no. 3 the local impacts of the sydney 2000 olympic