‘It’s a stitch up’, councillor claims over draft LEP amendment

COUNCILLORS have expressed their frustration at what they call a “watered down” draft of a Local Environmental Plan (LEP) amendment, which proposes changes to the rules for intensive blueberry growers in the Nambucca Valley.

At their December meeting, they voted to “hold the line” and rework the document before submitting it to the NSW Government – for a second time.

“It’s a stitch-up, which offers nothing like we wanted to achieve,” Councillor David Jones told News Of The Area.

Despite introducing the requirement for Development Approvals (DAs), the onus remains on blueberry growers in the Nambucca Valley to self-regulate, with buffer and riparian zones, as well as development applications, unmandated.

The issue has been a flashpoint over the past few years and last month’s Public Forum, held the evening before the council meeting, further highlighted community tensions.

Mayor Gary Lee struggled to maintain order in the chamber when two community members, Allison Mackay and Ainslie Ashley (President of the Nambucca Growers and Producers Association), used the forum to speak out against the softened approach in the latest draft proposal.

The large audience present loudly voiced agreement.

In November 2024, Nambucca Valley Council asked the State Government to approve amendments to the LEP which would have forced new intensive horticulture operations to apply for Development Applications (DAs) and include buffers and riparian zones within the farms to limit off-site impacts.

The proposal was knocked back by the State Government in early 2025.

It recommended that Council consult further with stakeholders, who had considered the changes unworkable.

The latest iteration of the draft proposal (December 2025) was presented to councillors as a potential solution to their ongoing concerns.

However, it drew criticism for not addressing the intentions of the original.

“Council previously [in 2024] passed a Rolls Royce LEP amendment to regulate intensive horticulture … and I don’t think we should give up on [that] just because the State Government has a tin-ear,” Councillor Susan Jenvey argued.

“I don’t think we should give up on a clear and direct attempt at regulation and settle for a watered-down, industry-led, checkpoint farm plan, with no regulations around buffers, stormwater, environmental impacts et cetera.”

Councillor Jones said, “The decision makers are not in this room: DPI, Department of Planning, various lobby groups, industry players, political players – we know the rest – none of them are in this room and they’re not representing our public.

“You can tell I’m frustrated.”

Others vocal on the issue included Ljubov Simson, Jane MacSmith and Martin Ballangarry.

Although it sought to implement DAs for new intensive horticulture ventures, the proposal made clear that it did not seek to implement any controls beyond the NSW Government’s current expectation that farmers self-regulate according to industry best practice guidelines.

Furthermore, the draft proposal suggested exempting other forms of intensive agriculture such as viticulture, turf farming and irrigated crops from submitting DAs as is currently required.

Councillors resolved to undertake further consultation and work towards a planning proposal that better addresses the community’s concerns.

Councillors also called upon members of the community to supply accounts of their own experiences with the impacts of industrial scale horticulture, to be forwarded to the Department of Planning with the final draft proposal.

By Ned COWIE