The joint highway scheme is currently under construction and consists of multiple stages, covering 33km of new and improved highway that will eventually link up two of the city’s main highways (M4 and M5) [2]. The project has been described as the ‘missing link’ by its supporters, who argue it will help solve Sydney’s congestion issue [2]. 

The initial proposal for the project came from the newly created state government agency Infrastructure NSW, with a board consisting of high-level private sector actors and government officials, which was formed to provide the government with independent expert advice [1].

Infrastructure NSW proposed WestConnex in 2012 and the project was soon after named a ‘State Significant Critical Infrastructure Project’; a decision that received criticism for its lack of appeal process and limited public consultation [1]. In 2013, the first Business Case for the project was presented to the government, and the following year the Federal Government confirmed funding the project with 1.5 billion AUD in addition to establishing a 2 billion AUD loan [1]. The same year, the Sydney Motorway Corporation (SMC) replaced WestConnex Delivery Agency in charge of project design and financial work, and concerns soon emerged regarding SMC’s transparency [1]. In 2015, work on the first stage of the project began with the widening of the M4 and demolition work in western suburbs of inner Sydney, sparking protests in the city [1]. The following year, the Green Party decided to lead a People’s Public Inquiry in NSW Parliament House in order to formally raise concerns around the project’s transparency [1]. In April 2018, the NSW government approved the final third stage of the WestConnex project, with new toll roads announced [1]. The same year, the NSW government awarded a 51% stake in the SMC to a private consortium led by the Australian-based road infrastructure company Transurban [3]. In December 2018, following continuous concerns around the project’s public consultation and transparency, the NSW Legislative Council Public Accountability Committee issued a criticism of the NSW government and its approach to WestConnex in relation to its business case, alternatives to the project, accountability and transparency processes [1]. 

New WestConnex toll roads opened in 2019, while the NSW government is currently exploring options of further privatising the remaining 49% to finance the last stage of WestConnex, with a scoping study to be conducted into the ownership of the project in 2020 as part of the government’s privatisation agenda [4]. Impacts The NSW government is presenting WestConnex as the sensible solution and ‘missing link’ to Sydney’s pressing problem of traffic congestion, and has argued that further benefits of the project include increasing economic opportunities through gains in productivity for commuters and freight operators as well as creating jobs [1, 2]. 

However, there has been strong opposition from multiple groups around the negative environmental and social impacts of the project as well as an overall questioning of the benefits the expensive highway project will bring to Sydney residents. Frustration has come particularly from residents in the inner-west of the city where the project has acquired homes for demolition, causing forced evictions, while house-owners have argued that their properties have been undervalued [2]. 

This issue became particularly controversial when it emerged that over 100 new property owners had not been informed that their properties would be demolished, and other residents said they would be forced to move out of the city due to Sydney’s highly inflated property market [5]. Sydney residents also voiced concerns around increases in road traffic and emissions due to induced demand from new roads being available, as well as traffic pouring into local streets from commuters trying to avoid tolls [6]. One activist voiced the following: “There’s an emphasis and a focus now on car transport and inducing traffic, forcing people into cars. That’s truly a last-century solution, the rest of the world is actually ripping up freeways and motorways. It’s appalling for all of us” [7]. 

According to the WestConnex Action Group (WAG), residents close to WestConnex construction have been negatively impacted from air pollution for the past years due to close proximity to construction sites [8]. Furthermore, affected residents have highlighted that beyond air pollution from construction, an increase in traffic and the use of unventilated smokestacks in tunnels will cause more air pollution in the future [1, 8]. Protesters highlighted the close proximity of tunnels to schools, putting children at risk from air pollution [1]. 

Amongst environmental concerns arising from the WestConnex project is the removal of as many as 800 trees from a section of the public Sydney Park being developed for the project, according to protesters [9]. Prior to the removal, protesters had created a ‘Save Sydney Park’ camp with hundreds of volunteers involved in maintaining what acted as the organising centre for the campaign against WestConnex [5]. A compilation of pictures from the inner-city suburb of St Peters shows the impacts on the neighbourhood and Sydney park with whole blocks cleared for building works related to WestConnex [9], replaced with what critics have described as “spaghetti-style” roads disrupting the cityscape [2]. Bicycle NSW have also been vocal in the debate around WestConnex and highlighted the risk resulting from dismantling a popular Sydney commuter bike route for the construction of the WestConnex, leaving dangerous detours for cyclists [10]. Opponents have since the inception of the project warned against growing costs of the WestConnex, as costs have increased over the years [1]. 

Overall, the issues of lack of transparency and constrained public consultation in the WestConnex process have been widely criticised by opponents. One argument points to how the decision for the highway as the ‘logical’ next step and ‘missing link’ has been depoliticised and public consultation limited and moved out of the political arena so that underlying reasonings behind the project could not be challenged [1]. 

Thus, the government lacked open debate and citizen engagement “by masquerading as public engagement while simultaneously actively contriving to deny voice to those who would dare to disagree”, sidelining both public voices and expert opinions [1]. The fact that there was no formal public consultation on whether the project should go ahead has been criticised as denying the public any say in how to address Sydney’s future transport needs, with the Environmental Impact Statements (EISs) ultimately being the only formal means for the public to have a say [1]. Furthermore, the decision of dividing the project into sections with separate EISs, meaning there was no opportunity to comment on the project as a whole [1]. 

As a result, opponents of the project decided to create a ‘People’s EIS’ process in order to provide a space for advice and support to those wanting to make a submission, apart from the formal EIS meetings reliant on technical arguments [1]. A study into the planning procedures of the WestConnex found that both the public and planning officials were sidelined in “processes [that] were changed to reduce opportunities for consultation, ultimately fueling resentment among many members of the public and leading to public protest and civil disobedience” [1]. 

Ways of mobilising have included a long-running occupation camp in Sydney Park, rallies and protests as well as confrontations with police and construction workers that have lead to arrests [1]. In opposition to WestConnex, a group of residents from the affected areas of Sydney came together to form the WestConnex Action Group (WAG) to mobilise against the multiple projects of WestConnex. The group has recently set up a damage register for people whose property has been damaged by WestConnex in order to document and map the extent of the damages and advocate for those affected, including campaigning for a damage repair fund, independent damage assessment and potential class action [8]. Furthermore, the group is preparing to make a formal complaint about air quality problems related to the construction of the WestConnex projects [8]. In February 2015, a rally in the streets of Newtown, Sydney saw around 3000 people attending with local Greens politicians, WAG, and other organisations, opposed residents and supporters taking part [11]. 

The Sydney Park occupation camp was launched in 2016 and became the hub of the anti-WestConnex campaign [1]. Protesters camped at the site for over a year, however faced stricter penalisation for protesting with new NSW legislation put in place in 2016 that effectively made public disobedience almost possible [1]. Civil disobedience was made a semi-criminal offense with fines up to 50,000 AUD and potential consequences for people’s work life and overseas travel [1]. However, this also meant that the anti-WestConnex protests gathered a lot of media attention that protesters used deliberately to strengthen their campaign [1]. Methods used by contractors and the police to deal with protesters included building temporary fences around protesters in order to then serve move-on notices and warnings before making arrests for being within an enclosed space [12]. In February 2018, around 1000 people from 30 different action groups, including unions and local community groups, came together in the streets of Sydney in a joint protest against ongoing problems with the NSW road and transport system [13]. Protesters rallied around issues such as problems with the NSW rail system, ongoing privatisation of transport and major infrastructure projects such as WestConnex [13]. 

Almost 13,000 submissions from residents, councils and community groups were submitted in response to the EIS for the first section of the project [14], and a parliamentary petition submitted with over 10,000 signatures in 2015 [15]. The Greens have also strongly opposed the project from the start and pressured the NSW government, together with the Labour party, by demanding a National Audit into the business case behind the project [2]. Political opposition has also come from several inner-city councils including the City of Sydney, Leichhardt and Marrickville [14]. Both Marrickville and Leichhardt Council used their limited powers in attempts to oppose the project by blocking WestConnex from conducting preliminary roadwork in the spring of 2016 [12, 14]. While Stage 1 and 2 of the WestConnex have been completed and opened up in 2019, opposition to Stage 3 is continuing with the WestConnex Action Group still actively leading its campaign [8]. 

The campaign is increasingly focusing its attention on the NSW governments preparatory work into privatising the remaining more 49% state share in the WestConnex project [4]. Furthermore, activists have pointed out the wider significance of the WestConnex case: “It has come to represent how governments plan and build cities in an age of climate change and ballooning metropolitan populations” [7]. WestConnex is thus sparking a debate around whether tax money should be spent on more toll roads as opposed to investing in rail and other public transport [7].