It's on thing we are building a city - but we have to live in it too

We’re a year out from what will be Australia’s first "liveability" election, when NSW voters go to the polls. Now we just need to work out what that word means.

Liveability, the NSW government says, is about making NSW a “great place to live” with “inclusive and welcoming communities and celebrated natural assets”.

This principle was threaded through the government's three latest major statements: the Three Cities plan; the Future Transport Strategy; and the Western Parklands City Deal.

Gladys Berejiklian inspects the first new Waratah trains in Sydney on Thursday.
Photo: AAP

Opposition Leader Luke Foley foregrounds the same values with his “schools and hospitals before stadiums” pitch, which Premier Gladys Berejiklian sought to counter on Saturday when she proposed a $1 billion expansion of Nepean Hospital.

But how does liveability play out in the far flung reaches of orphan estates like Oran Park, Harrington Park and Narellan, where - even under the City Deal - there’s no sign of a train whistle blowing any time soon?

How will liveability find room to breathe in the tightly wound confines of Green Square, an area hurtling towards a population density of 22,000 people per square kilometre?

Hospital emergency department wait times are worsening, particularly in south-western Sydney. School classrooms are crowded with children and faltering equipment served by internet speeds that make your Commodore 64 look supersonic.

Green Square is experiencing a surge in population.
Photo: Peter Rae

The nature of the big ticket campaign commitments the Coalition and Labor are announcing - even this far out from the election - prove they’re aware of how pivotal liveability issues are in winning over battleground electorates.

"Liveability" is an unusual angle to take for a government that has a ripping good economic yarn to spin. Under Berejiklian and her predecessor, Mike Baird, NSW has gone from the worst to best performing state on almost every fiscal indicator. NSW is the focus of $80 billion in “hard” infrastructure projects over the next four years alone.

Building stuff, especially transport, usually gets a big tick from voters. It’s why politicians have a hard hat and hi-vis vest hanging at the ready in their electoral offices.

But maybe people just aren’t feeling the benefits of this economic narrative - a Herald poll last week revealed “almost half of voters do not think NSW’s multibillion-dollar investment in transport will improve their commute”.

The gulf between being told that things are going great and feeling that they are is widening.

When voters emerge from booths on March 23 next year, they will have either restored or walked away from the idea that politics is about more than infrastructure projects. They might also have enjoyed a sausage sandwich, with onion thanks. Now that’s living!

Andy Marks is assistant vice-chancellor of Western Sydney University.