Here is a report from a Queenslander who experienced forced amalgamation. I have changed the names of the towns, councils and shires to names of chocolates. What can I say? I like chocolate...
"I am very pleased to pass on the experiences of forced amalgamations. My former shire of Kit Kat is now one of the members of the amalgamated council of Picnic Regional Council (after a name change from Flake Regional Council as at the time of the first election, the name of Flake was opposed from the very beginning because it was a former town council at the centre of the donut but the government would not listen. However people power in the last couple of months sought the change and was successful). I am now a bystander from the amalgamations as I relocated to the neighbouring Cherry Ripe Shire which was relatively unaffected by amalgamation apart from having a reduction of representatives from nine councillors plus the Mayor (at which I was successful) to four plus the Mayor.
As far as I can see there is no benefit as yet from the process only lots of cost (in the millions) large increases in rates to cover the costs as the government will not give any assistance to the blow-outs because they are flat broke!!
The town of Crunchie, which was the administrative centre for the Kit Kat Shire, is suffering badly as the office which was once a vital hub for all the activities now has the feeling of a morgue. The people of the shire are totally demoralised, rarely see a representative (the old council area did not get one elected representative on the new council, where formerly they had nine plus the Mayor).
Services are just about non-existent , road maintenance has declined to a point where roads that were identified as priority one and would be graded twice a year now have been graded once in 18 months, robust plant replacement programs have been trashed and a directive to purchase second hand machinery and rebuilds for major breakdowns are across the board, school enrolment declined from around the stable 100 for many years dropped to 50/60 in twelve months, houses vacant everywhere whereas before council had to move in houses to meet the demand.
All major repairs for machinery is done in Flake (machinery freighted to central workshop). I quite often talk to my old work colleagues and they are totally demoralized and where they went that extra mile for the old council they tell me they do not have the inclination to do one bit more than they are paid to do as the community spirit is no longer there. They tell me the communication is appalling and half the time they do not know what they are supposed to be doing.
I could go on for ever, I am so sad ,as the little Kit Kat Shire was identified in the highest category for sustainability for a rural shire and there was no good reason to see it amalgamated with any other shire apart from to prop up shires that had been categorised as unsustainable. Now all amalgamation has achieved is one larger unsustainable council.
Similarly, I received the following comment from a Qld CEO of a Shire not amalgamated:
'The Queensland reform is yet to provide any benefits , as I see it. The cost of amalgamation has been huge for the affected Councils. Very large increases in rate levies have been a result over the past two budgets across the State. The cost of wages equalization alone resulted in an impost of several million dollars for some Council’s.
Then the cost of IT mergers is huge also , with the annual expense of rental on the lines running into several hundred thousand dollars.'
From discussion with affected CEO’s , it will take years to get back to some semblance of order , and the staff morale is extremely low" .
Sounds promising, doesn't it?
Interview with Minister Castrilli
This interview with the Minister for Local Government, John Castrilli was held on 13th March 2009.
Click here
After listening, click the BACK button on your browser to return to my blog.
I can't believe that someone could repeat themselves so much no matter what question is ask
The interviewer tried to push him on his stance on forcing amalgamations and no way would he even rule out the option. He just kept repeating the same thing over and over and over again!
The minister is being a typical politician and saying something without saying anything at all.
Blog to stay open!
I've received advice from WALGA about my blog:
"With regard to your enquiry concerning the keeping of a blog, it is not uncommon for elected members to express their personal views by whatever method or media they choose. The Association advises elected members to take care any comment they make is not in contradiction with role of a President/Mayor, to speak on behalf of the Local Government, nor to do any thing that may contravene the Local Government (Rules of Conduct) Regulations 2007."
I think that my blog satisifies the above criteria, so I will keep it. I've had many, many positive comments from people both within and outside our Shire about the concept of a blog as well as the content that I have entered.
My intention is to inform, educate and express my opinion. People are welcome to comment and disagree with my opinion, so I feel this is a fair process.
The South Australian Amalgamation Experience
If you are still thinking that amalgamation is a positive experience for our Shire and others like it, you may be interested to read the following. This is an excerpt from a person in South Australia who has experienced amalgamation:
"The District Council of Yorke Peninsula was formed in Feb 1997.The Council covers an area of 5,834 sq kms, has a distance of approximately 175 kms between its northern and southern boundaries, and being a Peninsula, has a varying width east to west averaging approximately 30 kms.
The Council is unique in comparison to other Local Government Authorities in that it is bordered by sea on three sides and as such has 435 kms of coast line. The Council shares its northern boundary with the District Council of the Copper Coast, District Council of Barunga West and the Wakefield Regional Council.
BRIEF:
At the time of amalgamation we were lead to believe we would be basically rolling 4 into 1. That Minlaton being the more central location would be upgraded to accommodate extra senior staff and become the main office premises and the other 3 offices would close and become “shop front” only, for customer service requests, dog registration etc. Later, major renovations were carried out at Minlaton increasing the size for extra staff... staff that we didn’t know we had to have... THEN, renovations elsewhere followed with an upgrade of the offices in Yorketown , then the renovation of the Minlaton Town Hall Supper Room to become a Council Chamber. (Yes we had 4 very good council chambers but suddenly none considered suitable.)
Maitland not to be out done then had the Council offices updated. The upstairs of Minlaton Town Hall (formerly used as a picture theatre) was turned into offices. Followed by the building of a totally new office complex attached to the existing Yorketown offices. And still, now some 12 years on we continue to have renovations and extensions to offices that were to be non existent but are more than well utilized and cater for the ever growing number of staff.
I have been present at meetings where the Council have been asked how many current employees, they have...the answer is usually ...around 150. However they will never give the break down of inside workers to outside workers. Eg white collar to Blue collar. We have far too many secretaries and assistants, managers and pa’s. We have 2 full time IT “specialists”.
Things that come to mind since amalgamation
NO maintenance is done on the local halls. Every town has an Institute or Hall which is Council property. Towns now desperate and setting up public committees and raising funds as halls in such bad state of repair and must be fixed. Small communities are proud of their local hall.
Town ovals and facilities have been let go, little or no maintenance. Sporting Clubs being charged increasing fees for use of playing fields and club rooms, while having to undertake repairs and maintenance as well.
Each community has had to raise funds to upgrade their own town playgrounds...Very little / if any, financial help from LG.
Several communities have a Tidy Towns Group who carry out maintenance and gardening in their relevant town. Again very little if any financial help from LG and very little if any service from them. Eg..volunteers now water and mow ovals, prune town roses , clean town barbecues etc.etc.
Excess machinery and vehicles were sold off after amalgamation....only to find a year or so later that we didn’t have enough and that the plant we had, had to be shifted further distances. Unproductive work days.
Gravel roads are graded less. No gravel on roads, so when they are graded, nothing is achieved.
We have a northern and Southern work depot and work gang... up to 2 hours a day can be lost in their travel to and fro a job and shifting equipment.
Many tens of thousands of dollars and voluntary hours have been contributed to the success of these parks. There will be no return to the community. In Stansbury’s case there is threat to loose the Visitor Centre as the funds from park support this and the town office.
The Community's Tidy Towns Group, who were finalists in Australia’s Tidiest Town will be without funds and the successful Seaside Markets will be lucky to do another summer season as marketing and admin are sponsored by the Progress. Ruthless...Council just see the dollar... and see it as theirs. "
So, our fears aren't imaginary, they're very, very real.
Survey
People within the Shire of Kent will receive a survey this week asking them to indicate a preferred option should the Shire be forced to amalgamate.
This has come about from information that came out of Local Government Week. Cr's Skipsey, Grant-Williams and I attended this year. Both the Minister for Local Government and the Premier indicated that VROC's were not acceptable as a structural reform option. Much discussion was had with some of our neighbouring shires. The general feeling was that some form of amalgamation was inevitable. Therefore it was in our own interest to indicate where our preferences for amalgamation lay.
This was further galvanised when the Shire of Katanning released their draft submission which looked at including the town of Nyabing in its 75km radius sweep.
The Shire of Kent is still committed to upholding it's constituent's wishes that we do not amalgamate. What we are requesting from the survey is, that if we are forced to amalgamate, which current Shire/s would you prefer to join?
I'm still totally against amalgamation for our Shire. I can't see the benefits at all. We are in a healthy financial position and since we are a farming community, our rate base is stable. Our communities are full of strong, forward thinking people. I believe we are perfectly capable of taking our community into the future without the need to join another shire or group of shires.
To me, amalgamation means huge expense with little result. The main beneficiary seems to be the major town in the group. Amalgamation won't mean we'll have more people living in our towns, it won't create employment in our towns (in fact, jobs will be lost!), there won't be more services in our towns, so what's the point?
For the 'Other' option, in our shire survey, I'm putting "No other option - no amalgamation".
I urge you to do the same.
Independent Public Schools
Nyabing Primary School has the opportunity to be a pilot school for the new Independent Public Schools Programme being trialled in WA.
WOW! What an opportunity!
As a small country school, we can show how proactive our community is - a small town with big ideas! We're not stuck in the past, but we're looking to securing our future. We can have more of a say in how we run our school because, as a community, we will own it. We will have the ability to shape our school to match our unique requirements, not other people's ideas of our requirements.
One of the Primary Schools in the Shire of Kent is looking at leading the way with change and allowing it's community to be a part of that process.
What does this tell our neighbours and our State Government? Yes, we will embrace change only if we are able to see major benefits from making those changes. We want empowerment, not subservience.
I urge the Nyabing community to get behind this great opportunity and fill out their surveys. Please return them to the school ASAP before Monday 31st August.
Blog may have to close...
I'm getting some legal advice from our local government association, WALGA on the legal aspect of having a blog as a councillor.
It was brought up at our monthly council meeting this week about whether I'm liable because I'm making public comments considering my position as a local government councillor.
It's sad when it gets to this. I thought we had a right to free speech no matter what position we hold in society. I've not made any comments on behalf of council, only my own thoughts on issues of council that affect us all as a community.
I sincerely hope that WALGA are able to clarify the issue and I can be allowed to continue keeping you all informed in this manner.
How to annoy, aggravate and alienate your neighbours
The Shire of Katanning have now presented their Draft Structural Reform Submission and are advocating boundary changes within the Shire of Kent. (Since writing my blog, I've had a comment from a reader who found it interesting that no community consultation was mentioned in the Shire of Katanning's submission. Interesting indeed!)
In their submission, the Shire of Katanning laments the lack of interest from its neighbours in progressing the issue of structural reform. The Shire states, "Despite undertaking substantial discussions with our neighbours there has been little if any progress towards an agreement on structural reform".
Their overall concept of their proposal is to
'form a new "Upper Great Southern Council", centred around the established regional centre of Katanning with a boundary radius of approximately 75km'.
The arguments behind this proposal include the belief that a Local Government's service area should match it's rating area. As a 'donut' council, Katanning is considered to provide services to a population that lives outside of their 'ratable' area.
A good sounding argument you would assume. However, if I look at the services that our family personally accesses, I would say that the cities in Perth provide most of the services we use that our immediate local area doesn't provide. Of course, I use banking and shopping facilities in Katanning, but these are not provided by the Shire. I would also say, that without the support of the surrounding shires, the shops and banks in Katanning wouldn't be doing so well...
The Shire of Katanning appears to believe that banks, shops and schools are a part of the service that they provide to the community.As for the services they do provide, I believe that there is a 'user pays' system. I have been told that people who are not in the Shire of Katanning pay more than locals to use the swimming pool, for example.
So, I'm not sure that this argument holds water. Perhaps a lot of people outside the Shire use the Katanning Library (I use their toilets!) and tramp through the Art Gallery?
The Shire of Katanning have presented a number of options for the Minister for Local Government to consider in their submission.
Option 1 is the "amalgamation of 8 shires around a 75km radius of Katanning and another amalgamation in an arc around Albany".
The Shire of Katanning is currently working with the City of Albany in planning groupings of "regional centres". In a proposal to our Local Government Minister, Katanning have the view that the current structure of local government in WA 'hinders effective governance in the region'. Their preferred option for the Minister is to "remove present local government boundaries and form new larger Local Governments based around established regional service centres of Albany, Katanning, Narrogin, Northam, Merredin etc."
Option 2 is to "reduce the number of Local Governments in the Great Southern Region".
The submission provides a suggestion that the region be divided into 'zones'. Southern, Western, Northern (2 options), Eastern.
Option 3 is the "algamation of all 11 Shires in the Great Southern Region".
This option has come from the City of Albany and many councils questioned the viability of effectively delivering services to such a diverse and unwieldy collection of regions.
Option 4 is to "do nothing - Katanning stands alone and requires that all grant funding recognise Katanning as providing services to the area and provides compensation accordingly".
This option then goes on to discuss the 'inequity of grant funding', in particular, the Financial Assistance Grants which are provided to the State Government by the Federal Government for distribution. A table is provided showing $ per head of population, but not per acre of land the Shire is servicing.
Another table shows the 'inequity' of the Rudd Economic Stimulus Package Allocations, again as a $ per head figure.
The comment is made, "Although the Shire of Katanning provides many of the regional services to the smaller Local Governments, the grant allocations serve to 'prop up' the smaller shires". (How to win friends and influence people)
The Shire of Katanning have indicated that their "preferred solution" is to "encourage the Minister to completely rethink the current Local Government boundaries". A radius of 75km around the town is discussed once again. This would take in all or parts of Kojonup, Wagin, Gnowangerup, Broomehill-Tambellup, Cranbrook, Dumbleyung, Kent and Woodanilling.
This is essentially splitting the Shire of Kent. The Shire of Katanning suggest that the eastern portion could be taken up by Lake Grace.
This resultant new "Upper Great Southern Shire" would have a combined population of around 12,000 with a rate base of about $11m and a staff of 232 in an area of 17,500km2 . The proposal is to have 12 councillors to begin with and eventually reduce to 8 elected members.
The issue of smaller towns is addressed under the following headings:
"Potential loss of employment and consequent eventual loss of population".
The Shire of Katanning has assured the "townships" of Woodanilling, Broomehill, Nyabing and Dumbleyung that "service levels...could and should be maintained, at least in the short to medium term , to ensure that the residents of these towns suffer no substantial loss of services".
This is interesting. Why do our towns only receive good service levels in the short to medium term? I guess it would be easier to have a town close down, then there's less grumbling about why the ovals are looking shabby and the pool needs maintenance. Or, am I just being cynical?
The submission also reports that our towns would not be able to justify an administration presence. The Shire of Katanning would maintain 'shopfront services' in these locations if the community supports and uses them.
"Loss of local Representation and Community Identity".
Mention is made in the Shire of Katanning's submission of an elected member ratio of 1:700. That would leave the western end of the Shire of Kent (the area the submission is considering) with about one third of a councillor!
"Loss of location specific services, ie, medical services"
Although the example given does not necessarily relate to our shire, the submission indicates that if the community wishes to keep such services, then Specified Area Rating would be used to pay for the service.
The submission also includes a "Transitional Timeline" which is as follows ("in an ideal world"):
- March 2010 - decision and announcement of new structure by State Government
- June 2010 - existing CEO's depart and Interim CEO and Commissioners appointed
- October 2011 - new councillor elections
- January 2012 - new CEO appointed
- October 2013 - reduction in Councillor numbers from 12 to 10
- October 2015 - reduction in Councillor numbers from 10 to 8
In a discussion under the heading, "Regional Grouping", further comments are made about the lack of interest in neighbouring shires in forming an alliance with Katanning. The City of Albany has apparently also experienced the same issue. The two have endorsed a Memorandum Of Understanding recently.
A list of all the meetings and forums where the Shire of Katanning has been present shows there dogged persistence in pursuing their idea of structural reform.
Although I have been present at only one of the meetings where Katanning was present and reform discussions were had, the overall impression many have perceived from representatives of the Shire of Katanning is of arrogance rather than alliance. At this particular meeting, held in Dumbleyung in March 2009, the president, Mr Phil Rae, kindly told me that I needn't worry, Katanning had no interest in amalgamating with the Shire of Kent. I'm pretty sure that the town of Dumbleyung is about as far east as any representatives from the Shire of Katanning have ventured.
The remaining submission deals with proposals/submissions previously put to the Minister and WALGA on amalgamation and reform.
I find it interesting that the Local Government Advisory Board chose to ignore the Shire of Katanning when considering the amalgamation of Broomehill and Tambellup Shires. What does this tell us?
Royalties for Regions
Council will begin looking at projects which can be funded by Stage 2 Royalties for Regions grants.
What sort of projects would you be interested in undertaking in our communities?
The criteria for expenditure is as follows:
- address infrastructure requirements
- improve asset management and capacity building
- encourage standardised asset management practices and improved regional governance in local government.
PINGRUP:
-
Assist with upgrade of one of the accommodation units at the Caravan Park with facilities for couples. This has already been funded by the PPA through a grant. - Satellite Internet for the Telecentre, or upgrade the Exchange to ADSL2+
- New Community Building to include new Telecentre rooms and office for visiting professionals. Community members have said they'd like an office for visiting health professionals, IT specialist and the visiting Child Health Care Nurse.
- Assist with upgrade of Ladies Changerooms at Pavilion
- Build Accommodation Units at Caravan Park
- Employ consultant to plan the Historical School Site landscaping and building fit-out.
I'm planning to advocate that the Shire use some of the money to upgrade our asset management systems and perhaps join a structured assets and infrastructure program. As this is a very expensive undertaking which will require a large percentage of staff's time, we can use Royalties for Regions regional funding to employ a person to manage the three (or more) council's assets and infrastructure programs. Other councils in our region may want to be a part of this too, so it would be wise to consider our neighbours if we decide to investigate this project.
If you have any ideas on how we can best utilise our regional funding, please leave a comment.
Alternatively, you may phone or email me:
p/f: 0898291076
m: 0427 297 712
e: skinflint@skinflint.com.au
Local Government Elections
Elections will be coming up on October 17th, 2009.
This year, instead of voting for nominees for your ward, you will be voting for all the people who put up for council.
That includes any incumbent councillors whose term is up and who are re-nominating. Thank goodness WALGA managed to persuade the Minister for Local Government to push through Parliament the change from the proportional preferential voting system back to first-past-the-post. This not only makes things easier for our staff, but is considered to be more transparent and less likely to be manipulated by anyone including the major political parties.
It is therefore important that as many people as possible vote on election day. This will ensure fair representation of our two communities. At present we have 4 councillors from Pingrup and 4 councillors from Nyabing. This has worked very well over the time I have represented our Shire and a continuation of this balance would be fair and equitable for all.
If you are not on the electoral roll, please make sure that you enrol. Rolls will close on the 28th August, so please get your name down before then. As taken from the Department of Local Government and Regional Development website:
"Local Government Elections
Enrolling to Vote
Enrolments for the next ordinary elections on Saturday, 17 October 2009 will close on 28 August 2009.
To be eligible to vote in local government elections, you need to be either a resident, an eligible non-resident occupier of rateable property in the local government district or a nominee of a body corporate that owns or occupies rateable property in the district or ward. You must also be correctly enrolled to vote in State or Commonwealth elections and be at least 18 years of age on election day."
More information, including definitions of the terms 'resident', 'eligible non resident' etc, can be found here.
Nominations for candidacy open on the 3rd September and close on the 10th September. Information about standing for council can be found on the Department of Local Government and Regional Development website: Standing for Council
If you are at all interested in keeping your community strong and vibrant and would like to make a difference, have your say and determine future policy, then I urge you to consider standing for council.
Council isn't just about Rates, Roads and Rubbish. There are many more issues and interests that affect your community. The Kent Shire Council is heavily involved in supporting community groups by allowing free use of our public buildings and recreation grounds, partnering with groups to assist with funding applications and working with groups to improve facilities in our towns.
Now, more than ever, Council are facing tough decisions on the future of our Shire. Structural Reform is the hot topic of the day and Council are advocating for our community.
Council have now signed a Memorandum of Understanding with the Shires of Dumbleyung and Lake Grace, so regional matters will now be on the table more than ever.
Mr Ripper Admits He Comes from Nyabing!
The Hon Eric Ripper MLA, leader of the Opposition addressed the meeting following Mr Barnett. His first comment was that he came from the Shire of Kent and grew up in the town of Nyabing. Don't worry folks, I didn't sit there quiety!! I yelled out "Woohoo", and waved my arms, much to the embarrassment of my colleagues Cr Bruce Altham, Cr Neil Grant-Williams and Cr Lucy Skipsey.
Mr Ripper then went on to mention that he went to the small school of Nyabing Primary where his education became the grounding for his future life as a politician. Once again, the others ducked under their seats while I did the old "Woohoo!" and then yelled, "I still teach there!"
He vowed that he has serious reservations about the concept of Year 7 students being pushed to high school. He understood the pressures that this would place on people in rural areas and wondered what the educational outcome for such a move was. He received applause for this statement.
With respect to the issue of structural reform, he stated exactly what many of us at the meeting were thinking, that there has been secrecy, poor leadership and little consultation other than last minute whistle-stop tours to the regions. I like his analogy that the 'minister has sent the players out blindfolded, not having any idea where the goalposts are'. This is so true!
Mr Ripper felt that cooperation between councils with options such as resource sharing, including sharing personnel, was a significant way in which reform can be achieved. Other paths have been unexplored, which is my feelings exactly. He stated that local government reform should be about better services, not about disenfranchising.
We need to adopt common laws and practices between neighbouring councils so there's less red tape. He told the meeting that he didn't think the state government would be delivering the Royalties for Regions money in the coming years that Mr Grylls is promising. He said the Labour Government had a strong policy on investment in regions. I don't think the meeting agreed with him there.
I went out after his talk and caught him in the lobby where I shook his hand and introduced myself. He recognised the Tuffley name and I thanked him for his comments and discussed the Year 7 middle school debate.
Local Govt Week, Day Three, Part II
Prior to the WALGA (WA Local Government Association) AGM, the Hon Colin Barnett MLA, Premier of Western Australia, addressed the conference.
Mr Barnett left us in no doubt that by 'structural reform' he means a lot less local authorities. At present, there are 139 local governments serving around 2 million people in Western Australia.
Mr Barnett said he would like to see less than 100 local government authorities in 5 years time. He stated that the status quo is not an option. He also mentioned that forming VROC's (Voluntary Regional Organisations of Council) was only the second best option.
This leaves the Shires of Kent, Kukerin/Dumbleyung and Lake Grace with a huge dilemma. We have chosen the VROC path as our preferred method of reform. We would like to be given a chance to work with this before making any formal commitments such as a ROC (Regional Organisation of Councils) or amalgamation.
Representatives of these three councils have had discussions about our options during the week and will take our thoughts back to the rest of our councils when we return.
Local Government Week, Day Three
Our third and final day began with the introduction of four fine young leaders in our state:
- Elizabeth Shaw, 2009 WA Young Citizen of the Year
- Tim Goodwin, National Indigenous Youth Movement Member
- Albert Jacob JP MLA, Member for Ocean Reef
- Cr Lisa Schofield, City of Kalgoorlie-Boulder
These four were articulate and dynamic with much to say about letting young people in our communities have a voice. They all advocated Youth Advisory Councils as an effective way for young people to begin engaging with councils.
Although one or more said that councils need to look at new and innovative ways in which local government can engage with their community, they didn't really offer any suggestions.
Cr Lisa Schofield suggested more incentives for young people to join local government, but again, wasn't specific in saying what incentives are needed.
I believe that the Shire of Kent is trying to make the job of being a councillor more accessible to young people. We are looking at purchasing laptops for councillors to access all our council emails and paperwork such as agendas. We have also increased our remuneration package. If you are at all interested in joining council, please contact me to discuss this further. It can be very rewarding and enables you to make a difference in your community.
Lisa also mentioned that our community needs educating about local government, but she didn't offer up any ideas about how this is to be achieved. I'm hoping that my blog goes someway into assisting our community with learning about the current issues affecting local government and the community.
Following our young leaders, we were inspired by the amazing story of young film maker Khao Do as he delivered a fascinating talk about his life. Arriving in Australia as a two year old refugee, travelling in a tiny, overloaded fishing boat, Khao went on to become an award winning film maker and was named 2005 Young Australian of the Year.
I didn't take any notes during Khao's presentation as I was totally absorbed in his story. What an amazing young man who faced incredible stumbling blocks along the way to success. He is an ardent footy fan and spent his school years desperately trying to make it big in the senior team, despite being, "too small, not the right ethnic type and not very good at football". He finally ran out with the team one day and kicked their first goal in a game which they eventually won.
Khao stressed that his personal mantra is to "always look at what you have and not what you lack". An excellent way of looking at local government in this particular political climate!!
Local Government Week, Day Two
Today our first session was all about the economic recovery, a financial health update.
Dr Chris Caton isn't your average boring old economist. He's clever, funny and very interesting. He gave a concise and visually interesting outlook on global economics, trends and forecasts.
Chris states that Australia is in recession. Apparently, there's no official definition for 'Recession'. The unofficially accepted condition is when the GDP is down for two successive months. This hasn't actually happened in Australia, so the powers that be can say, 'we are not in recession'.
However, Dr Caton believes that the unemployment rate is a good indicator, and, Australia's unemployment rate has risen to the level where we are now in the grip of a recession. Certainly not as severe as we have previously experienced, but a recession, none the less.
All in all, Australia is looking pretty good. Our recovery appears to be slower than other countries, but this is due to the fact that Australia's fall wasn't as steep. Another interesting thing to note was that Australia's economic rises and falls are closely related to the US economy. Well, no real surprise there.
Dale Alcock followed with a reasonably interesting talk, but minus the facts and figures on the screen. If he'd taken a bit of time to throw together a few charts to support his comments or even photos, his point would have been just that much stronger.
He had a few daggers to throw at the Towns of Vincent and Cottesloe in regards to planning, both approvals and policies. Why didn't he have some photos to back all this up? I admire Dale immensely, but someone in his company needs to get him organised and into the 21st century when it comes to the tools of technology.
Unfortunately, after that, I developed a huge headache that looked like it might turn into a migraine and I had to leave part way through the next speaker's session on Constitutional recognition for local governments.
The evening was spent in a very productive way with a get together between the Shires of Kukerin/Dumbleyung, Lake Grace and Kent to discuss our options with regard to the new information we've gained from both the National's Leader, the Hon. Brendon Grylls and the Local Government Minister, the Hon. John Castrilli.
Each of our Shires is putting forward the preferred option of 'no' to amalgamation, which is one that our constituents have requested. We will indicate that our councils prefer the VROC model of reform.
However, as more information is coming to hand and the media are starting to take hold of the issue, it's appears that this may not be the acceptable option. Both Ministers have stated that they will not accept the status quo, with Mr Gryll's indicating the R4R carrot will be withdrawn for that particular choice. So much for 'a voluntary process'. I'm very disappointed in Mr Gryll's stance. I voted for the National Party with the idea that their platform was to protect rural interests.
Therefore, our shire representatives may need to look at different models such as a formalised ROC. To me, this looks like another level of government. Will a ROC work? I don't know. I'd like the chance to try a VROC first, but there doesn't seem to be any chances within this process since timelines are extremely short and extremely rigid.
I just hope that the decisions we make will be the best ones for our communities. I feel the weight of the world on my shoulders right now.
Local Government Week, Day One
Today started with a bang. Frans Johansson, author of the Medici Effect, delivered a fast paced, loud and fascinating talk entitled 'Renaissance - The Medici Effect'.
This guy was incredibly dynamic, energetic, clever and funny. But it was what he had to say that made the most impact.
Frans talked about how teams and organizations can create an explosion of remarkable ideas at the intersection of different fields, cultures and industries. The main points from his talk were as follows:
-'Intersections' -Develop new ideas from combining ideas from various perspectives
-'Diversity drives innovation'.
-All new ideas are combinations of existing ideas eg. The Bikini + The Burqua = The Burqini
-Diverse Teams see things differently - therefore, make sure your teams are made up of very diverse minds and cultures
-The more ideas you have, the more likely you are to have a good idea. (Simple really, but not something we always do!)
A wonderful example was given about the challenge given to architect Mick Pearce. He was asked to build an attractive, functional tall building in Harare, Zimbabwe. But, the catch was, it was to have no air-conditioning! Now, Harare tends to get pretty hot in summer and temperatures can drop to single figures overnight.
Fortunately, Mick was a pretty broad thinker and he was able to achieve the seemingly unachievable by studying termites. Termites use a clever system of cooling and heating in their mounds that are built in the African plains. They direct breezes at the base of the mounds with cool, wet mud and channel these through the mound when needed. They build new vents and close old ones in order to regulate temperature precisely.
The company which hired him immediately saved $3.5m simply by not purchasing the air conditioning hardware. Temperature is a constant 22 degrees and the buildings use 10% less energy than those around it.
The two speakers who followed held little interest for me as their talk was all about City Revitalisation. Of the two, Evan Jones, National General Manager of Planning, Mulitplex Living, was very interesting and had some great examples of good and bad town planning.
After lunch, Brendon Grylls presented an update on Royalties for Regions. He also explained his support for Minister Castrilli's reform strategies. Brendon spoke eloquently and showed his passion for the survival of rural communities.
The President of the Shire of Roebourne presented a really interesting look at what it's like to have a community that is booming due to mining, but then has to cope with all the negatives that come from this including artificially elevated living costs, difficulties getting infrastructure on the ground and the fly in, fly out population problems.
The following speaker sent everyone to sleep. We all headed for the coffee when he finally finished! The sad thing was, he had a lot of interesting things to say, he was just unable to say them in an interesting way.
The afternoon finished with the man of the moment, the Minister for Local Government, Hon. John Castrilli MLA. He once again re-iterated his plans for the state. It seems he will not move beyond his single and only idea of amalgamation as the one size fits all solution for structural reform in Western Australia.
Following this, we had the CEO of the new entity of the City of Geraldton-Greenough. Since this was an extremely sensible amalgamation, I was prepared to turn off, but this young and dynamic guy was very interesting and had a lot to say about how WA is so Perth-Centric. Other states are not so Capital City oriented.
The next speaker was also very interesting and topical for me as he is the Chair for the South East Avon Voluntary Regional Organisation of Councils. This group has been successfully running for five years and follow a model of organisation which is based on a South Australian model. Section 42 of the Local Government Act (SA) allows for a local government to establish a subsidiary. The system uses a Body Corporate Charter. The Minister approves the application and the Charter. The group is lobbying State Government to change the Western Australian Local Government Act to allow for the same system.
A panel of the previous speakers then took questions from the audience. Confusingly, the Minister strongly dismissed the idea of VROC's as a suitable strategy for reform. He stated that he is looking at amalgamation and amalgamation only as a reform measure.
I wish he'd been around at the first session and listened to Frans Johansson. He may then realise that there are many ways in which a local government can achieve reform without having to amalgamate.
Outcome from Meeting with Minister
- Today the people in the Great Southern had the opportunity to talk to the Minister for Local Government, John Castrilli, at a public meeting in Wagin.
I was disappointed at the small contingent that turned up at the Town Hall. The Shire of Kent was well represented with four councillors and two community members.
People came from far and wide, with representatives from Wickepin, Katanning, Woodanilling and a number of other shires.
The Minister opened with the meeting by reading out the range of 'benefits' that are outlined in the Local Government Reform Steering Committee's "Structural Reform Guidelines, February 2009.
They are listed as:
- increased capacity for local government to better plan, manage and deliver services to their communities with a focus on social, environmental and economic sustainability
- increased capacity for local government to have adequate financial and asset management plans in place
- enhanced efficiency in the processing of planning, building and other licence applications made by business and community
- greater ability to attract staff including the provision of further career development opportunities
- greater competition for positions on council, and, in addition with other reforms, potential for enhanced government capacity
The process, as I understand it from the Minister's talk today, goes as follows:
1. Councils are to send Submissions to the Ministers office by August 31st with their preferred reform, amalgamation proposals and preferences.
2. The Minister will then give his recommendations to the State Government (around Dec 2009)
In providing recommendations, the Minister stated:
a) Those Councils wishing to amalgamate will be given every assistance to do so.
b)If a rural council indicated they did not wish to amalgamate, he would recommend to the State Government that they not be forced to do so.
The Minister was asked to clarify what the term 'building capacity' meant as this was a phrase he used frequently. I don't believe we received an answer to this.
Another question was raised as to the meaning of the use of the word 'diversity' in the assessment of a council's checklist. The term was used in the report back to the council indicating there was not enough diversity in their council structure. Again, the Minister was unable to clarify the meaning.
I asked a question of the Minister, "Why are you pushing amalgamation as a reform when there is research (FSRB in South Australia) showing that 'amalgamation brings with it significant costs and exaggerated benefits; and there are many other forms of cooperation and integration between councils with amalgamation being the most extreme and confronting form of integration'. The report also found that 'there are ways to overcome this disparity between councils' capacity to fund service delivery, including shared delivery service models, strategic alliances and virtual local governments.' "
I asked, "With this in mind, why is the Minister pushing amalgamation as the only sort of reform?"
The Minister's response was that the South Australian Government did not commission that report (SO???) and then proceeded to confuse everyone with a convoluted explanation of the South Australian model which did not really answer my question at all.
There were many impassioned comments and questions to the Minister which were answered with a similar circular response. The standard answer was that it was all about 'capacity building' and it was 'a voluntary process'.
The Minister seemed to have to rely on his Aide to supply vital answers and information to the meeting. His responses were repetitious and standardised, with little hard evidence or any indication of the distinctions that should be applied to city and rural council reform.
Interestingly, he mentioned that State Government needs to undertake reforms as well to improve their efficiency. My belief is that, when State Government complete an efficiency and sustainability checklist, then put forward a submission based on the results of the assessment of this checklist, and undertake the recommended reforms, then Local Government can follow suit. And, not before!!
At the conclusion of the meeting, I was asked to provide a comment for ABC Radio. I agreed to do so, and the question was, "What is the feeling you take away from this meeting today?"
They would have edited out any swearing, so I went with a response that indicated our frustration at the reform process, especially the checklist, and that I came away disappointed and frustrated.
I wish I'd had more time to think about it, as I would have re-iterated the fact that the State Government has still not provided us with any significant proof that their reform process of amalgamation will improve services and efficiencies.
An argument against amalgamation
The aim of council amalgamations, so the Minister for Local Government, John Castrilli says, is the 'potential to save ratepayers millions of dollars per year'. The Minister is advocating that amalgamation will reduce the cost of local service provision through increased operating efficiency. In other words, 'bigger is better'.
No systemic review of these outcomes has ever been done in Australia! If I could find any paper or report that shows that council amalgamations led to cost efficiency and better service delivery, I would support amalgamation.
There is revealing research into the impact of amalgamation in South Australia by the Financial Sustainability Review Board (FSRB) (2005) in its Final Report: Rising to the Challenge: Towards Financially Sustainable Local Government in South Australia (Dollery 2005). The FSRB (2005, 48) found that council 'size does not seem to matter much, with both larger and smaller councils both typically registering operation deficits in 2003-04.' Also mentioned is whether population density was a factor and the conclusion reached was 'the same is true for density characteristics, with both the denser and sparser groupings also both registering operating deficits that year'.
The Board also argued that although the architects of earlier structural reform in South Australia claimed the reform process had achieved 'recurrent savings' of $19.4 million per annum, 'whether the ongoing savings have in fact continued is a moot point'. The Board also concluded that, 'fewer, larger councils are not the instant or easy fix that many would like to believe, especially in non-metropolitan areas dominated by the "tyranny of distance" and other impediments'. (FSRB 2005, 85)
From these observations, the Board also concluded that 'amalgamation brings with it significant costs and often exaggerated benefits' and that 'there are many intermediate forms of cooperation/integration among councils, with amalgamation being the most extreme (and confronting) form of integration'.
Also, 'there are ways to overcome this disparity between councils' capacity to fund service delivery, including shared service models, strategic alliances and virtual local governments'. The report also stressed that 'collaboration between councils can and should be a major contributor to councils being financially sustainable in the future'.
The Commonwealth Grants Commission (2001, 52-3) found five main reasons for financial difficulties that confront Australian local government, three of which result from higher levels of government placing strictures and controls on local government:
1. 'devolution' - where a higher sphere of government gives local government responsibility for new functions
2. 'raising the bar' - where a higher tier of government through legislation or other changes, raises the complexity and/or standard at which local government services must be provided, thereby increasing the cost of service provision
3. 'cost shifting' - where federal or state government ceases to provide an essential service, thereby forcing the local authority to take over the responsibility
It is doubtful that amalgamation is going to alleviate or reduce these problems. No one has been able to prove that 'bigger is better'.
The City of Wanneroo has indicated in a document entitled 'Draft Community Engagement Brief', dated 18/6/2009, 'amalgamation programs conducted in other states have generally failed to improve financial sustainability. Indeed, it would seem that the financial position of many local authorities, both large and small, has continued to deteriorate. A national report by PricewaterhouseCoopers in recent years, indicated little difference from a sustainability perspective, between councils where amalgamations had been forced and councils in States such as Western Australia where forced amalgamations had not occurred'.
So, with all this evidence indicating just the opposite of what the Minister hopes to achieve through this reform, why is he still pursuing this course of action?
Meeting with Minister
The Minister for Local Government, John Castrilli, has organised a number of meetings around the state in order to explain the government's local reform agenda.
Time will be allowed for the public to question the minister about their concerns.
Everyone is urged to make an effort to attend the meeting with the Minister. The meeting for the Great Southern is to be held in:
I'm taking my car, so please contact me if you would like a lift to the meeting. I will be leaving straight after school at 3.10.
