‘Belongs to the nation’: Cross-party push to stop sale of Victoria Barracks

A growing alliance of Labor MPs, Liberals, Greens and independents is opposing the sale of Paddington’s Victoria Barracks as controversy intensifies over the federal government’s sell-off of prime heritage and waterfront defence property in Sydney.

Defence’s divestment of 13 NSW sites, including Victoria Barracks on Oxford Street, part of HMAS Penguin on Middle Head at Balmoral and Spectacle Island near Drummoyne, has sparked fears that significant public land could be lost to private interests.

The criticism from across the political spectrum adds to objections from heritage advocates and veterans. State Liberal MP James Griffin and his mother, Cathy Griffin, a former Greens councillor and the first female Barracks Commandant of Victoria Barracks, are the latest to demand the Albanese government abandon plans to sell the Paddington site.

Cathy Griffin, formerly Major Cathy Horne, said the barracks risked becoming derelict if it was vacated by Defence before a decision was made on its fate. “The barracks can be opened up to the public and for commercial use alongside continued defence occupation of the site,” she said.

James Griffin, MP for Manly, said “there are some places that belong to the market and some that belong to the nation”. “Victoria Barracks belongs to the nation,” Griffin said, adding it was “part of our national story, not a line item in a property portfolio”.

“The decision to sell it is lazy privatisation by stealth. Surely, the NSW government should have first option to see if some hybrid urban renewal alongside appropriate recognition of its history and military presence can be designed.”

Coogee state Labor MP Marjorie O’Neill and Campbelltown Labor MP Greg Warren are also opposing the sale of barracks, with O’Neill telling Defence Minister Richard Marles that “Victoria Barracks, Sydney is not surplus land, nor is it a disposable asset”.

Victoria Barracks sits on 13 hectares between Oxford Street and the Moore Park precinct that’s home to Allianz Stadium and the Sydney Cricket Ground. It was established in the 1840s and was first occupied by the British Army. There are 12 heritage listings within its grounds.

Housing and property industry advocates have described the defence divestment as a rare opportunity to build much-needed housing. The Property Council wants the Commonwealth, states and local governments to develop a joint taskforce to speed up land assessments and planning.

NSW Housing Minister Rose Jackson has said the state government was a potential buyer, and Planning Minister Paul Scully last week said he had asked “Homes NSW to investigate potential options for Victoria Barracks” while ruling out “aggressive” development.

After distancing his government from the sale, NSW Premier Chris Minns was forced to apologise for flippant comments about the sale in question time last Thursday.

After being asked whether he supported the sale of the barracks, Minns said it was a matter for the federal government. “To the extent that I have thought about it, I will leave it up to them. I am not proposing a major campaign,” Minns said.

“I do not own it. It is a bit like when my neighbour wanted to sell his boat. I was happy because it would clear up the street, but it did not really have much to do with me.”

Veterans groups were outraged by Minns’ comments, with the premier later apologising on 2GB, saying he had a “shocker” and he would never mean to offend veterans.

Sydney independent MP Alex Greenwich, whose electorate is home to the barracks, also believes it should stay in public hands. “Handing it over to property developers would be short-sighted,” he said.

“That said, given the size of the site, it does have the potential to provide public open space and much-needed public housing,” Greenwich said.

“Let’s not take a binary approach to this, but assess community need and master plan appropriately.”

Independent Wentworth MP Allegra Spender also argues a significant portion should be kept in public hands.

The federal opposition has criticised the divestment as a fire sale.

Defence hopes to net $1.8 billion from the sale, which it will reinvest in its strategic priorities. It came under fire in Senate estimates this week, when Coalition and Greens MPs argued that the expected profit was small in the context of Defence spending, and would amount to a fifth of a single Hunter-class frigate.

The department said the savings arose not just from the sale, but also from no longer having to pay high maintenance costs, often for heritage buildings. All sites were expected to be released to the market within two years.

Start the day with a summary of the day’s most important and interesting stories, analysis and insights. Sign up for our Morning Edition newsletter.