Noosa mayor Bob Abbot asked the questions on his way to Brisbane by car last Friday for his shire’s amalgamation protest march.

What’s Peter Beattie’s hurry? Why is he prepared to put Kevin Rudd and federal Labor at so much peril?

Why is he so desperate to push this through? What is behind it?

Abbot’s questions stemmed from a decision by the Queensland premier late last Thursday to grant Noosa some form of planning immunity, a protection for its existing values that apparently a newly amalgamated Sunshine Coast could not afford.

Rather than embracing the premier’s assurances, Abbot was scornful. He had a right to be.

The three mayors and their councillors had that week already been summoned, at a moment’s notice, to a meeting at Mooloolaba SLSC which appeared to be as much about Mr Beattie showing who’s boss as anything else.

Then, on Thursday night, the premier announced “icon” status for Noosa and Port Douglas, two communities angry that their best planning endeavours were about to be swept away.

If this was a genuine step in the orderly and planned reformation of Queensland’s local government structure, why did it look so glaringly like an ill-thought-out attempt to deflect criticism?

Rather than placate Noosa protesters, it has left most of them suspicious, while the rest of us are left wondering when we get a say.

Because whether you live in Noosa or Maroochydore, whether you have been here for the past 30 years or the past 30 minutes, indeed whether your investment in this region has been a lifetime or a massive mortgage and your children’s futures, we all have a stake in what happens next.

The premier’s hurry may be his desire to lock in the structure that will mandate a doubling of this region’s population by 2026, but is another 200,000 people within the next 18 years really what residents want?

There has been a sustained and intense lobby up the east coast of Australia by the Property Council and Urban Development Institute of Australia, aimed at giving developers “certainty” in their dealings with local authorities and “consistency” in planning rules.

As a consequence the character, charm and lifestyle qualities that once defined our beachside communities are being lost in the haste to satisfy the demands of one influential interest group.

But where is the certainty for the rest of us?

Is our right only to the ground under our feet and not also to character and amenity of the areas into which we make the biggest capital investment of our lives?

Amalgamation can be more than a vehicle to drive the Property Council’s definition of opportunity and vision for the future.

Things don’t just get better because they are bigger. Future prosperity will come from being smarter, and feeding solely from the trough of growth can never be described as smart.

Noosa has done the rest of us a very big favour. It has shown that if you are passionate and committed to what you believe in, you can force off his stride even a premier with the majority Peter Beattie enjoys.

Beattie’s admission that protection of Noosa values can be guaranteed only through a special Act of Parliament rightly has many south of Peregian wondering what the future holds.

“We’re special, too,” was the cry from many after news of Noosa’s special status was announced.

Amalgamation could be a good thing for the Sunshine Coast and a good thing for its residents.

But as I said last week, if residents don’t get hold of the process and next March elect candidates who appreciate the nature of that “specialness” and who have the focus, strength and commitment to deliver on their expectations, then the future of this once very special place will be largely defined by the vision of one special interest group.

In parliament yesterday, Member for Noosa Glen Elmes attempted to get an answer to the questions framed by mayor Bob.

Local government minister Andrew Fraser’s response: “Mr Speaker, in the end the point of the matter is this: at a state and federal level, independent commissions set the boundaries and we should all accept the umpire’s decision. In this regard, the independent local government reform commission has provided recommendations.’’

That would be the independent local government reform commission appointed by the government, no doubt.