ABSTRACT: The governance frameworks of major Australian cities are characterised by a high degree of fragmentation, with responsibilities spread across three levels of government, a range of departments and dozens of local councils.

No one has overall responsibility for managing the city and this is nowhere more apparent than in relation to metropolitan planning and infrastructure provision. Planning the city is both a marginal activity in terms of its status within state governments and at the same time contested between levels of government, usually state and local.

In Sydney, one result has been a series of planning strategies which were started with ambitions that were often not possible to fulfil. These fragmented governance frameworks have also been challenged by the continued expansion of Australia’s major cities in the post-war era. This growth has for the most part been poorly supported by minimal infrastructure provision, imposing enormous social, environmental and economic costs on residents in these areas.

In response to these challenges a number of less formal governance arrangements have been created, which can be characterised as “soft” forms of cooperation, rather than “hard” metropolitan institutions. Some of these new structures have a regional focus, such as the Regional Organisations of Councils or ROCs which first emerged in response to the Whitlam Government’s engagement with urban policy in the 1970s.

This paper draws on both research and the experience of the author’s involvement with WSROC for over 14 years to survey the attempts of these regional organisations and in particular the Western Sydney Regional Organisation of Councils to overcome fragmentation and the urban planning “deficit”. The ROCs have both challenged the formal governance institutions and attempted to provide an interface between them with the aim of overcoming the historic patterns of underinvestment in infrastructure and services especially in areas of major population growth.