Wednesday, February 25, 2026
The battle for the future of Lee Point reached a fever pitch at the City of Darwin on Tuesday night, as community members were met with a combination of procedural “bullying” from the Chair and a stunningly outdated presentation from Defence Housing Australia (DHA).
The “Classroom” Forum: A Breakdown in Democracy
The evening began with a 30-minute Public Forum—traditionally a space for any ratepayer to raise concerns. However, Lord Mayor Peter Styles attempted to unilaterally redefine the rules, claiming the forum was restricted to items already on the night’s agenda.
When challenged by PLan Convener Nick Kirlew on this procedural overreach, the Lord Mayor resorted to intimidation tactics, threatening to remove a sitting Councillor who attempted to engage with the public.
“The Lord Mayor is running the Chambers like a classroom,” said Mr. Kirlew. “By attempting to gag the public on issues not on his hand-picked agenda, he is directly violating the Council’s own Meetings Policy (Policy 0043). This is policing, not governance.”
The Case for Lee Point: Expertise vs. Artifacts
At 5:30 PM, the formal session opened with a 15-minute presentation from the Save Lee Point campaign. A panel of experts and traditional owners presented a powerful, evidence-based case for a moratorium:
- Lorraine Williams (Larrakia Danggalaba Traditional Owner): Spoke on the irreversible cultural heritage risks.
- Graeme Sawyer, David Percival, and Ian Redmond: Presented technical data on biodiversity loss and infrastructure liabilities.
- The Petition: A formal petition signed by over 1,000 residents was presented, providing an undeniable community mandate for change.
In a move described by attendees as “insulting,” Defence Housing Australia (DHA) followed with a slide deck that appeared to be 10 years old. The presentation included infrastructure—such as new schools—that the NT Government has already confirmed are no longer part of the plan.
The “Profit over People” Admission
The most damning moment of the night came during questioning from Council members. Under pressure, the DHA representative admitted that the project’s primary objective is now to “maximize income” from the site and that high-density apartments are being considered.
“This admits what we have suspected all along,” Mr. Kirlew noted. “This isn’t about ‘Defence families’—it’s a commercial profit play at the expense of Darwin’s last wildlife corridor. They are selling a decade-old dream while building a future infrastructure debt for our ratepayers.”
The Nightcliff Challenge
With the Nightcliff By-election only 10 days away, PLan is putting the candidates on notice. We are calling on Ed Smelt, Suki Dorras-Walker, Anjan Paudel, and Phill Scott to answer one simple question:
Do you support the Lord Mayor’s ‘gagging’ of community voices, or will you commit to the independent business case Darwin deserves?
What You Can Do:
- Read the Policy: View City of Darwin Policy 0043 to see how our rights are being restricted.
- Stay Informed: Sign up for the PLan newsletter for updates on the Nightcliff candidate responses.
- Contact Your Councillor: Tell them you expect a Council that follows its own rules.