Most councillors and social groups have made it clear the inclusion of another big-box liquor store in Ballarat is one too many for a city that already has its fair share of liquor-related problems. There are numerous arguments about how a retail store contributes to this problem and some might argue the damage has already been done.

The need to regulate alcohol sales is not generated by the fact that it is, in itself, an evil but that a culture of excess creates evil consequences, and across Australia in varying degrees, including in Ballarat, we have that culture. One councillor rightly pointed out these are problems that demand a broader and more complex array of solutions than the planning act.

On the other hand it could also be argued that every little step helps and the so-called “Liquor War” between the big supermarkets is based on price not quality.

However the central problem highlighted by the council’s own report is that the jurisdiction of the council’s decision is about planning and the principal areas of planning concern surrounding amenity.

On these grounds, with some conditions, including reduced opening hours, the council officers recommended granting the permit.

Objections based on competition, although legitimate enough in an age of the supermarket duopoly, cannot be considered under the planning act. But this week a majority of councillors said no.

A corporation as large and successful as Coles is unlikely to take this as a final answer when it feels it has a viable investment.

A VCAT hearing based on the planning act has the potential to prove a council decision as so many words. At best this week’s decision is a futile conscience vote. At worst it is moral grandstanding with an entirely predictable outcome.

But the broader pity here is that, as with the pokies, councillors who we trust to have the best interests of the community at heart when they make these decisions are often unable to make a decisions based on wider social implications.

The councillors are trying to plan for the future and the laws should enable that intent rather than emasculate it.