The recent controversy surrounding Bunnings' decision to relocate from Bunbury to Dalyellup has sparked a heated debate, shedding light on the complex interplay between business, community, and politics. This story is more than just a hardware store moving down the road; it's a microcosm of the challenges and tensions that arise when commercial interests collide with local aspirations.
The Move and Its Fallout
Bunnings' plan to vacate its current site in Bunbury and relocate to a new $70 million store in Dalyellup, just 10 kilometers away, has caused an uproar. The move has prompted strong objections from various quarters, including the Bunbury business community, the mayor, and both federal and state politicians. The concern is not just about the distance; it's about the potential impact on the surrounding businesses and the broader community.
One business owner, Eddy Gobby, raises a valid point about corporate responsibility. He questions whether Bunnings, as a prominent hardware giant, has a duty to consider the potential knock-on effects of its departure on other local businesses. This is a crucial aspect of the debate, as it highlights the delicate balance between commercial freedom and community impact.
Land Use and Housing Concerns
The proposed new site for Bunnings has also become a point of contention. While the land is zoned for urban development, allowing a mix of uses, it has been set aside for residential use in the Shire of Capel's structure plan. This has led to questions about whether the move will displace potential housing developments, a concern that resonates deeply with the community, especially given the South West's housing shortage.
Federal Liberal MP Ben Small has been vocal in his opposition, arguing that the land should be used for much-needed housing. He believes this issue is "red hot" because it directly affects the community's ability to address its housing needs. The land's proximity to a major highway connection has further complicated matters, with Capel council officers suggesting it may no longer be suitable for residential use.
The Role of Planning Authorities
The final decision on the land's use rests with the Western Australian Planning Commission (WAPC). A spokesperson for the planning minister has confirmed that the WAPC will consider community feedback and the City of Bunbury's formal objection before making a decision. This highlights the importance of the planning process and its role in mediating between commercial interests and community aspirations.
Business and Political Ties
Adding another layer of complexity to the story is the revelation of past business ties between Federal Liberal MP Ben Small and Bunnings' commercial landlord, Michael Prosser. Mr. Prosser's family has built a substantial property empire in Bunbury, known as Citygate Properties, which owns the Homemakers Centre where Bunnings is currently located. Mr. Small has also had a personal and commercial relationship with Mr. Prosser, having previously held joint ownership of a local bar.
Mr. Small, however, asserts his independence, stating that he has no commercial interest in the decision. This aspect of the story raises questions about the influence of business relationships on political decisions and the potential for conflicts of interest.
A Commercial Decision, or More?
Gary Mortimer, a retail researcher from the Queensland University of Technology, offers an interesting perspective. He suggests that Bunnings, like other big box retailers, often faces criticism when it moves into an area but not when it leaves. This raises the question of whether the same standards are applied to all retailers, or if there is a double standard at play.
Ultimately, the Shire of Capel will vote on whether to endorse the development plan, and the final decision will rest with the WAPC. This story serves as a reminder of the intricate web of interests and influences that shape our communities and the importance of transparent and accountable decision-making processes.
