Koala conservation, Brisbane’s heritage and plans for Hub68 are discussed in letters to the Editor, reflecting a shared and growing concern within our community about the direction of planning and environmental policy in southeast Queensland.
Something you may want to check out before 21 June is the State Government’s planning for an upgrade of the Dunwich ferry terminal.
If you have something to say about ferry terminals or anything else, email your letter to thereditor@redlands2030.net
Serious Concerns – Council submission to SEQ Koala Conservation Plan
Redland City Council has voted to support a submission addressing a proposed Koala Conservation Plan for SE Queensland.
Thanks to Redlands2030 for publishing a comparison between the original submission prepared by council officers and the version tabled at the Council meeting on 18 March 2026, which was carried 7-4.
The comparison highlights significant changes which only serve to weaken the argument to reduce the most significant issue of koala habitat loss, for example as shown by redaction of the following paragraph
The policy aim of Government in all instruments must be net gain of koala habitat, not no net loss Exemptions to clearing prohibitions should be limited to essential development and an avoidance approach taken as much as reasonably possible, by implementing advanced landscape planning to minimise impact. This approach should be applied consistently across all land use regulatory mechanisms and development assessment processes to remove uncertainty.
The original submission gave reference to current scientific information and addressed key issues such as clarification of rules for development and updating exemptions for clearing. In particular, refer to pages 11-13 where Council officers question the government limits for clearing and propose
- Any clearing between 250 m² and 500 m² becomes assessable clearing.
- Over 500 m² of clearing remain prohibited within a KPA.
Whereas the revised submission supports the larger limit of 800 m²
The original addresses in detail the need to prevent the use of multiple exemptions (“stacking”) to clear larger areas of koala habitat for infrastructure (i.e. p. 12-14). This was redacted in full.
These are only a few examples of the alarming changes I found were made to the original Officer’s submission about koala conservation in SEQ.
As reported in the Redland Bayside News, 26 March, at the meeting of 18 March, when the Mayor questioned the extensive changes to the officer recommendations, she was not given direct answers. Councillor Paul Bishop denounced the revised version as lacking a firm foundation, evidence- based research and thorough analysis. Those responsible for the selected revisions should have been made to provide detailed justification to support their actions, rather than as reported Cr Talty stated “councillors who do not support particular statements in the submission have removed those statements accordingly”.
On what basis were the selective changes made? This was an opportunity for the Council to “walk the talk” in respect to saving the depleted Redland koala population. Whose interests are driving the position taken by those 7 Councillors who voted away proposals based on years of koala research?
J.MC
Thornlands
Brisbane – an unattractive city losing its heritage
Over the past quarter century, Brisbane has rapidly transformed into an increasingly congested and, in many areas, unattractive city. This has not happened by accident. It reflects the growing influence of a powerful development lobby, combined with a willingness from governments at all levels to prioritise short-term gain over long-term community value.
In this equation, heritage has been the major casualty.
Character homes, historic streetscapes and culturally significant places are steadily being erased or diluted under ever-weaker protections. Each concession may appear minor in isolation, but collectively they are reshaping the city into something far less distinctive and far less liveable. Worse still, it is rare that the heritage and history of these places is even properly recorded for future reference before they are lost.
Heritage laws are not about preventing progress—they are about ensuring that growth respects identity, history and community memory. When those protections are weakened, what is lost cannot be replaced.
A city that disregards its past risks becoming generic and diminished—socially, culturally and economically.
If we continue down this path, we will not just lose buildings—we will lose what made Brisbane, Brisbane.
R.H.
Sunnybank Hills
Hub68: Hospital or health centre?
Claims that the Hub68 development will deliver a new private hospital warrant closer scrutiny. Current indications suggest it will operate as a specialist medical centre, placing it in direct competition with existing services near Redlands Hospital.
Recent experience with the Redland Bay “satellite hospital”—now more accurately described as a health centre with no surgical capability—shows how easily expectations can be overstated. The same risk applies here.
As a privately owned facility, Hub68 would also compete with the already downsized Mater Private Hospital. In that context, a boutique-style hospital offering reduced services makes little economic or practical sense.
If it proceeds as a health centre, it will duplicate services already available while potentially diverting patients from the public system.
The community deserves clear, accurate information—not marketing spin—about what is actually being proposed.
B.G.
Cleveland
More letters to Redlands2030
Parking, Penrith, and public opposition – in letters to Redlands2030
Water park project, waste collection, and housing affordability – letters
Community victory, Council priorities – letters to the Editor
