Warning of Illegality in Councils' Responses to Forced Mergers

Subiaco Post, 27th September. Click to enlarge

Subiaco Post, 27th September. Click to enlarge

Thanks to Freo's View for drawing attention to this.

Councils are not subject to direction by the Premier or the Minister for Local Government and must make decisions based on the best interests of 'the people of the district', according to the Local Government Act.

More Unnecessary Changes

Guardian Express, 24th September, 2013

Hot on the heels of bus routes having to be moved from William Street to Beaufort Street, north of the railway, largely because the City of Perth designed the 2-way William Street in a way that the PTA didn't regard as suitable for buses, we now have bus routes being shifted from Barrack Street to William Street, south of the railway.

Whilst there is some validity in the PTA's argument that having both directions on the one street improves clarity for public transport users, the downside is that most shoppers will have to cross busy William Street for their journey home. Shoppers with young children, in particular, will not appreciate this.

The same thing happened with the shift of William Street buses to Beaufort Street north of the railway, where the main destination for many is the Perth Cultural Centre. Passengers arriving from the north now have to cross Beaufort Street to get to the Cultural Centre - and there is no safe crossing point between the lights at Aberdeen Street and those at Roe Street. On top of that, the lights at Roe Street hardly provide safety for pedestrians given the complexity of traffic movements.

One of these days, if we're really lucky, the City of Perth will actually finish messing around in the core of the CBD and allow pedestrians to move around in safety, rather than having to duck around roadworks that seem to take forever (and now will presumably go on even longer, with the new lot of changes to William Street). It would be nice for businesses, too, to have a safe and predictable context for their customers to get to them.

Patronising Claptrap

The City of Perth agenda report on boundaries states:

The proposed extension to the City’s boundary would result in a significant addition to its infrastructure assets mainly in the areas currently in the City of Vincent. A comprehensive review of the assets has been undertaken and confirmed that the City would be exposed to higher expenditure to bring them up to a standard consistent with that presently in the City estimated to be $7.5 million. The cost would increase by $13 million if the whole of the City of Vincent were to be included in the City’s boundary.

I don't know what standards they mean and which specific assets they refer to, but I don't think there are many in the City of Vincent that need that sort of upgrading. Since the City of Perth's argument is largely that it ought to have, but currently doesn't have, these types of assets to be a genuine capital city, I doubt very much that they even have standards for them.

In any case, why no mention of the pure assets - $50 million of land in Leederville, $10+ million for the Department of Sport and Recreation Building and more millions for the recently-upgraded and extended Loftus Centre.

The City of Perth wants to make it sound that it is doing (some) Vincent residents a favour by taking on assets that it would have to upgrade. Pull the other leg, Perth, it's got bells on!

One More Blow to Vincent Identity

In another blow to the City of Vincent Council's push for incorporation into the City of Perth, the latter makes it very clear in its agenda report that it does not want to be split into wards. So much, then, for retaining the identity of Vincent as a ward of the City of Perth.

It wants "the City of Perth to retain existing electoral arrangements in accordance with the City of Perth Restructuring Act 1993 (undivided with Lord Mayor and eight Councillors)".

It does so in the knowledge that, because election candidates will need to canvas support across the whole local government area rather than just a part, it will be much more costly to stand for election - thus favouring those with deeper pockets or vested interests.

Who's Surprised? Not I.

Click to enlarge

Several times in this blog I have said that the City of Perth has no intention of or interest in agreeing to take the whole of the City of Vincent.

Well, now it's official. Not only does it not want the whole of Vincent (as the City of Vincent Council has been pushing for), it doesn't even want quite as much as the Premier had proposed - it doesn't want the largely residential area between Bulwer and Vincent Streets, but does still want all the areas with what it sees as major assets.

The City of Perth Council Agenda for last Tuesday included the following:
Northern boundary to follow Bulwer/Summers Streets rather than Vincent/Walcott Streets to address concerns about the dissection of the Beaufort Street shopping precinct, and to recognise it as a more definitive delineation of land-use and demographics.

Thus it uses the logical argument about Beaufort Street to divest itself of what it sees as residential encumbrances.

http://www.perth.wa.gov.au/sites/default/files/events/Special_Council_Agenda_130926.pdf

In what is a dead giveaway about the nature of its asset grab, it states:
The proposed boundary incorporates a number of the more significant recreational and community facilities that fit within a Capital City context because of the regional nature of these facilities. Such facilities include: 
- Leederville Oval. 
- Loftus Centre. 
- Nib Stadium

I'm not at all sure that Leederville Oval (at least I'm pleased to see they still call it that rather than M******k S*****m) or the Loftus Centre are truly regional - but we certainly know that Beatty Park is regional (ie its users come from a wide area of Perth), so why isn't that included in their grab?

Another Side of Sustainability

Colin Barnett has been big on the rhetoric of financial sustainability as a basis for forcing amalgamations of local governments - totally ignoring the fact that most of our current local governments, including Vincent, are financially sustainable.

However, there are many other aspects of sustainability that are important to us individually and collectively as a community. As a passionate supporter of sustainability initiatives (I am a Committee Member of the Sustainable Transport Coalition of WA, amongst other things), I was delighted to see that the City of Vincent is doing its bit to help all of us create a more sustainable future.

Go to http://www.vincent.wa.gov.au/Services/Environment_Sustainability/Programmes_Events/Sustainable_Design_Expo_2013 for more information.

Don't Forget To Vote

Even if you wouldn't normally vote in local government elections, please do so in the plebiscite on the future of Vincent. Voting papers will be distributed soon, with the Council election ballot papers, and will have full instructions on how to vote and return them for your vote to count. Note that the graphic below is the City of Vincent notice to electors and is not the ballot paper.

This is a one-off opportunity, if Colin Barnett gets his way and removes the right of veto electors currently have under the Local Government Act. 

Be sure to answer both questions, so that your vote clearly demonstrates whether you want Vincent to continue and, if so, in what form. 

Perth Voice, 26th September, 2013

WALGA Comes Out At Last

The WA Local Government Association has at last nailed its colours to the mast and come out in opposition to the proposed removal of the veto provision on local government amalgamations.

Previously, the WALGA State Council had passed what Joondalup Mayor and WALGA President, Troy Pickard, described as 'a compromise position to give the State Government and alternative to suspending the poll provisions', but without stating what that compromise was. It seems to me that any compromise must involve reducing the rights of electors to oppose effectively and would set a very dangerous precedent.

Take note, Colin Barnett, the WALGA State Council has 50% of its members from country areas of WA, so this is not just a city reaction to your ill-considered and arrogant 'final solution' for metropolitan local governments.

Source: ABC - http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-09-26/walga-votes-to-opposed-amendment-changes/4981908

A Way To Keep Energy Bills Down

Daily Telegraph (UK), 25th September

Not sure if you'd need a stove to get heat out election promises - there's so much hot air generated. And their main purpose is to give the great unwashed a warm and fuzzy feeling.

Recent experience demonstrates they're not used for anything else, including such minor matters as guiding government policy and actions.

Another Crack in the Wall

Click to enlarge

City of Stirling Acting CEO, Trevor Holland, makes some very important points, but as I pointed out in an earlier post here on 11th September, creating discord is what the Premier is about - so he can step in and impose his will in the name of preventing what what he has himself created.

Equally important, though, is the brief paragraph at the bottom of the piece in the Guardian Express. Mt Lawley, MLA, Michael Sutherland, has joined the ranks of Liberal MPs opposing parts of the grand plan to force local government splits and amalgamations - in this case, Michael has said he will support City of Stirling's proposal to retain Dianella, Menora, Mt Lawley and Inglewood - in other words, he'll oppose Col's intention to hive these off to Baywater/Bassendean.

With some opposing their own local details and others the fundamentally anti-democratic removal of the local electors' veto provision, it looks like Col has got a lot of spotfires to manage. Lets do all we can to make it a raging bushfire that will consume the Premier's ill-considered agenda for local government.

So Much For "Fully-Costed, Fully-Funded" - Entering the vicious circle

Click to enlarge

Hot on the heels of the loss of the state's AAA credit rating comes the 'realisation' that we can't afford all those shiny new toys promised by emperor Col at the last election - a mere six months ago.

No good hiding behind the loss of the AAA rating, though, Col, which was an entirely-predictable result of the reckless spending already committed on baubles we don't need - and many of us don't even want.

Not only that, but there are downstream costs of these projects as well. While no-one expects public transport to fully pay its way, the proposed airport rail link will be a financial white elephant of gigantic proportions that will compromise the ability of future governments to fund worthwhile projects.

Not The Royals' Day - But Vincent Fights On

Well, the Royals fell at the final hurdle, but there's still plenty of passion about saving Vincent. Frankly the Royals appeared to have lost the passion that they showed the previous couple of weeks in beating teams that had finished above them on the ladder at the end of the regular season.

There was no doubting the passion shown by Vincent people at the rally on Sunday morning, though. And that's incredibly important. If we don't maintain the passion - and, as Alannah MacTiernan said on Sunday, it will be a long fight - we will succumb just as the Royals did.

It was very noticeable at Sunday's rally that there was more emphasis on, and optimism about, the possibility of saving Vincent, not just avoiding its being split between Stirling and Perth. One speaker, who lived in Glendalough, described her experience in being 'taken over' by Vincent a few years ago and becoming part of the Vincent community - and said she had no wish to return to Stirling. I doubt there would be as much difference as some people think between being absorbed into Perth and being absorbed into Stirling, since neither of them really wants us.

But the greatest thing for me was the unanimous vote calling on Colin Barnett NOT to remove the poll provisions that give local communities the right to reject amalgamations they don't want - or need.

Go In Hard To Win

Today the Dockers. Tomorrow the Royals?

The Dockers and the Royals have more than a 2013 Grand Finals berth in common. Both teams go in hard, chase hard and tackle hard. That doesn't always find favour with the opposing team nor, necessarily, with the umpires - but it can bring spectacular results.

That's why I was, from the start, so frustrated with Vincent Council's being resigned to Vincent's disappearing right from the start of the forced local government amalgamations saga.

Let's hope that the now apparently more robust approach of Vincent Council, including the plebiscite, leads to another famous victory.

Been Here Before, James

Perth Voice, 21st September 2013. Click to enlarge

Back on 30th March 2008, I drew attention to the issue of school overcrowding in Vincent (Where Will They Go To School?) and expressed my view that the answer lay in imaginative incorporation of a new school into the Oxford Centre redevelopment, where Council owns 2 hectares of undeveloped land (car parks) - and on which the City of Perth currently has its beady eyes as a $50 million asset.

I don't believe it lies in getting rid of the Schools of Isolated and Distance Education, which ironically occupy the site and some of the buildings of the now-closed Leederville Primary School, as the buildings, configuration and land area are not suitable for a modern primary school.

Moreover, the staff employed by the Schools of Isolated and Distance Education contribute to the daytime population of Leederville and help support the businesses there.

Unfortunately, the redevelopment of the Oxford Centre has been put on hold because of the economic climate. I put it to you, James, that this time should be used to work out how best to use that redevelopment opportunity to create an innovative approach to primary education for the 21st century.

Did Anyone Seriously Expect Otherwise?

Click to enlarge

Back on 27th August, I wrote in this blog that it was clear that the City of Perth wasn't enthusiastic about taking on the whole of Vincent.

Before that, on 17th August, I argued in 'Speaker's Corner' in the Perth Voice that going straight to the 'one-in all-in' position left no fall-back position and quoted Polish Philosopher, Leszeck Kolakowski, who wrote: "it may well be that the impossible can only become possible by being stated at a time when it is impossible".

Now we have what was seen as the possible (the whole of Vincent being amalgamated into the City of Perth) becoming the impossible. And the impossible perhaps becoming possible with the plebiscite on 19th October.

At the moment, Colin Barnett has so many problems (see previous posts Bull(y) In A China Shop and No Fairy Godmother for Barnett in Canberra) that perhaps he might want to do without the aggro of forced local government amalgamations and, as another blogger has pointed out (http://freoview.wordpress.com/2013/09/20/cockburn-kwinana-merger-off), this could be a really good opportunity for him to scrap the forced amalgamations without losing too much face - not having the money for them could be seen by many people as a valid reason. 

No Fairy Godmother for Barnett in Canberra

Fresh from giving away WA's AAA credit rating, Colin Barnett has received short shrift from Tony Abbott in response to his suggestion that the GST be increased to ease the financial pressures his government has created for WA.

Next reality check for Barnett will be Abbott's refusal to fund projects like the Airport Rail Link White Elephant and possibly even the MAX.

There are even some road projects (the federal government's 'knitting' according to Abbott) that must seen as doubtful as they weren't included in the Liberal Party's election costings.

Never Mind The Law - Just Do As I Say

Click to enlarge

Yet another (this time Federal) Liberal abuse of legal process.

This time it's Treasurer Joe Hockey telling the Clean Energy Finance Corporation to cease operations, despite the reportedly clear requirements of the legislation under which it was established.

A quick reading of the Clean Energy Finance Corporation Act, 2012, does not suggest there are any Ministerial powers to direct the CEFC in this way, although a Minister could, no doubt, make life difficult for the Corporation in respect of financial and other matters that require the Minister's approval.

The CEFC can only be closed down by repeal or substantial amendment of the Act - which almost certainly wouldn't get through the Senate until after June 2014, when the changes in the Senate resulting from the recent election take place.

It seems that Hockey is intent on reinforcing the bully-boy image of Liberal Governments.

You can read the legal advice from Stephen Keim, SC, at http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-09-19/legal-advice-on-clean-energy-finance-corporation27s-termination/4969124.

A Diversion: Bizarre Humour in the Abbottoir

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/sep/18/tony-abbott-womens-minister-portfolio

One of my daughter's friends posted on Facebook recently that he couldn't tell the difference between the Australian news and political satire any more. Here's a classic example.

Interesting to read some of the comments about his 'Minister Assisting' in the Guardian, too.

Any suggestions for an appropriate caption for this picture?

Bull(y) In A China Shop

http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/-/newshome/18991122/wa-loses-triple-a-credit-rating

The words 'Bull' and 'China Shop' come to mind. Premier Barnett has been so intent on pushing through his pet projects in what is likely to be his last term in Parliament (and almost certainly last in Government), that he has given up the State's prized AAA credit rating.

It's not only in respect of local government that he has been playing the bully. Major projects such as Elizabeth Quay and the Burswood stadium have been pushed through with scant concern for the State's finances - other than to cut the budgets of many schools. And now there's talk of selling assets we already have to pay for those we don't need.

So perhaps it's less a case of a 'bull in a china shop' than one of a 'bully in a china shop'.

Vincent Plebiscite

Local newspapers are providing great support for the plebiscite to be held in conjunction with the local government elections for City of Vincent on 19th October.

These two (above) from the Guardian Express of 17th September.

Just as well, though, that the Electoral Commission has finally got the wording of the plebiscite questions right in its notices in The West Australian today (18th September) - after problems drawn attention to here a few days ago. The EC has also now got it right on its website for recording voting results as well (below).

Record Level of Interest in Local Government

Guardian Express, 17/9/2013

Despite, or perhaps because of, the sword hanging over many local governments, the number of candidates nominating for local government vacancies is an all-time record.

There must be something happening that has encouraged people to put up their hands despite the possibility that their term of office will only be 21 months rather than the four years that would normally be the case.

I shall be an optimist here and suggest that forced local government amalgamations might have been the issue - and that at least some of these candidates will be looking to make sure their Council continues beyond July 2015.

In Vincent there are eight candidates for each ward (2 councillors to be elected for each ward) and two candidates for Mayor. The danger with having such a large number of candidates is that voting can become a bit of a lottery.

I urge all voters to look closely at candidates' policies on so-called local government reform and to support those who oppose forced amalgamations and removal of electors' right of veto.

Petition: http://mylocalgovernment.weebly.com/uploads/2/2/7/5/22752710/petition_my_local_government_v1.3.pdf

My previous post mentioned (and provided a link to) a petition against the proposed removal of elector veto rights on local government amalgamations. This is a hard-copy petition and is in the correct format to be submitted to the Legislative Council. It is important to note that this petition is not restricted to residents of Subiaco - any resident of WA can sign it.

So if you object to the proposed removal of your democratic rights, print this off, write in your details, sign and return to Jeremy Mowe, 241 Rokeby Road, Subiaco, 6008. Get as many of your family, friends and neighbours to sign as well - but even one signature will help.

You must return originals via post or hand delivery if you live nearby or are going to Subiaco for any reason - scanned/electronic/faxed petitions are not acceptable, as the original signature is required.

This petition states:

We the undersigned residents of Western Australia are opposed to changes to the Local Government Act 1995 that reduce electors rights to decide on boundary changes and amalgamations.

Under the Local Government Act 1995 electors have the power to cause a poll and by such poll of the electors affected by an amalgamation of two or more Local Government areas, stop such an amalgamation. These rights should not be reduced or removed. 

Your petitioners therefore respectfully request the Legislative Council to oppose changes to the Local Government Act 1995 that reduce electors rights to decide on boundary changes and amalgamations.

Wrong Approach, Wrong Time

I have been told (by Jeremy Mowe, who is the driving force behind a petition in Subiaco to oppose the removal of the elector veto rights known as the Dadour Amendment/Provision). Jeremy says that the WA Opposition will be introducing a motion into the WA State Parliament (4.00pm today, Wednesday 18th September) calling on the WA Government not to introduce their amendments to reduce/remove elector rights from the Local Government Act.

Much though I support the intention of this, I'm not sure it's the best strategy at this time - indeed, it could be counterproductive.

For one thing, as noted in my previous post today, the Government has not yet decided what changes it will be introducing - and it would be an easy home run for Barnett and Simpson to argue that the Parliament should debate and vote on actual proposals rather than guess what those proposals might be. Despite Barnett's clear stated intentions, this is a valid argument.

More important, the Opposition's seeking to tell the Government what legislation it should or should not introduce into the Parliament runs the risk of driving those Liberals who are unhappy with forced amalgamations or removal of the veto provisions back into the arms of the Government.

Sometimes you have to hold your fire - and I believe this is one of those times.

Why Not Give Us Vote, Then, Col?

Colin Barnett is having to acknowledge the unpopularity (in his own party) of his proposed forced council amalgamations, but his arrogance is still on show when he claims (in the basis of no evidence) that the majority of the community does not oppose his so-called reforms.

Well, Col, if the majority of us don't oppose your changes, why not let us have a vote on them - your majority will win the day.

Click to enlarge

More Liberals Oppose Barnett

Five more Liberals are at least expressing 'severe concerns' about removing the right of ratepayers to veto amalgamations and splits.

And we shouldn't forget that this provision is not an easy one to comply with. Veto requires a majority in a poll in which at least 50% of electors vote. Even with postal voting, which has substantially increased voting turnout for local government elections, the typical turnout is 30-35% - so to get 50% must mean that the issue is of major concern to the community concerned.

Whatever , individually, we might think of the Gillard Government decision on the so-called carbon tax, I think Bill Hassell has hit the nail on the head as far as the WA Liberal Government is concerned, when he says that for the Premier to break his pre-election assurance of no forced amalgamations would have similar electoral consequence.

Another Liberal Breaks Ranks

South Perth MLA, John McGrath, has joined Perth MLA, Eleni Evangel, in opposing at least the detail of Colin Barnett's forced local government amalgamations.

Victoria Park does rely significantly on revenue from the Casino, which Barnett proposes to transfer to the City of Perth (along with the site of his proposed stadium) and this might be taken as evidence that it is not a financially viable local government. However, removing the Casino/stadium from Victoria Park and then merging the rest of it with South Perth disadvantages not only Victoria Park ratepayers but also those of South Perth. The revenue loss (plus the cost of amalgamation minus any, probably illusory, efficiency gains) will have to be made up across the new municipality as a whole.

And what is this for but to provide a subsidy to businesses (and possibly, the small number of residents) in the CBD of Perth. The revenue from the Casino is $2.8 million a year (not $16 million as reported in the West Australian) with only a fraction of this being spent in the immediate area. This is 4% of the rate revenue of the City of Perth. Other things being equal, City of Perth ratepayers could expect a rate reduction of around 4% as a result.

84% of the City of Perth rates revenue comes from office and commercial properties, with only 15% from residential properties, so the lion's share of this unearned dividend will go to business and commercial property owners.

Contrast that with the ratepayers of Victoria Park and South Perth. $2.8 million is equivalent to nearly 5% of their combined rate revenue; other things being equal, Vic Park/South Perth ratepayers (mainly residents and small businesses) could expect a rate increase of 5% as a result. That would be a substantial chunk out of any financial efficiency dividend.

Victoria Park/South Perth, like Vincent and other inner urban municipalities, has to bear financial, social and environmental costs caused by the thousands of cars (often with just a single occupant) that pass through them twice every day simply so that their occupants can get to and from work in the City of Perth. Perhaps it is time for the City of Perth to make some recompense - logically from the $60+ million parking revenue it receives every year (even after paying $10 million State Government parking licence fees) from those same car drivers.

Perhaps it is time, also, for the State Government to make a contribution from its parking licence fee revenue, which currently has to be spent within the boundaries of the City of Perth.

Busy Next Sunday

The City of Vincent's second rally to protest the forced amalgamations is at 11am in Angove Street, North Perth (same place as the first rally).

I'm pleased to see the change of slogan to 'Don't Split Vincent', which gives those of us who want Vincent to remain as an independent entity a stake in the rally, too. With the Vincent plebiscite coming up on 19th October, there is real hope starting to emerge.

A number of other local governments are also running plebiscites against forced mergers.

And the East Perth Royals made sure, this afternoon, that it will be an extra-busy day by winning their way through to their first WAFL Grand Final since they were last Premiers in 2002 - when, coincidentally, our opponents were the auld enemy, West Perth, as they will be again on Sunday 22nd September 2013.

In 2002, the game was virtually over by quarter time. Let's hope West Perth put up a bit more fight this time - but that the Royals still win.

Good to see the continuation of the good results from Leederville Oval - 2013 is the 11th of the past 14 Grand Finals to have featured one of the co-tenants of Leederville Oval - I refuse to call it Mxxxxxxk Sxxxxxm.

The Fine-grain of Communities is Important

I've mentioned the importance of detail before (http://ianrker-vincent.blogspot.com.au/2013/09/is-this-vincent-or-perth.html). It seems that others have similar concerns, including likely 'disengagement' of councillors as they battle to deal with big-picture issues.

Post News, 14th September 2013. Click to enlarge.

Do you want your 'local' councillors to be unaware of (or not have the time to think about) the issues that directly affect you in your local community? If your councillors don't have the time to care, no one else will.

Something Wrong With The Plebiscite

Looks like the Electoral Commission has made an error in the plebiscite questions for Vincent. As published on the EC website, the boundary reform plebiscite has the first question and responses, but only the responses (Yes/No), not the question, for the other one ('Should City of Vincent be abolished?').

There should be a second question ('Should City of Vincent be abolished?') before the Yes/No responses.

As it stands, the question and responses don't make sense, and certainly don't form a clear basis for electors to show their choices.

I hope that this format is, in any case, simply for recording votes and that the actual ballot paper will be rather easier to interpret.

Mandate for Everything?

Click to enlarge

The federal Liberals need to be a bit careful how they use their victory in the election.

Malcolm Turnbull, Communications Minister designate, argues that because the NBN was an election issue the new government has a mandate to introduce its version. He, therefore, chooses to brush aside a 200,000-signature petition.

The reality, of course, is that an unknown number of people voted Liberal (or National) despite their broadband policy - they might have done so because they supported, on balance, more of the LNP policies than Labor policies or , simply, because they were fed up with the in-fighting of the ALP.

A responsible government would at least seek some more information on what people really want on an issue as specific as the NBN. I'm not holding my breath for that to happen.

The downside (and it is a potentially huge downside) of the 'mandate' argument for the Liberals is that it applies to each and every one on the promises they made during the election. They can't pick and choose which promises to keep and which to abandon, if they argue that anything they said during the election campaign constitutes their mandate.

More (Basil) Fawlty Logic

Click to enlarge

Education Minister, Peter Collier, says that "WA secondary schools currently have fewer students per teacher than any other State", as justification for cutting school teaching budgets.

Note there is no mention of what is the best average class size for educational outcomes, including the ability for schools to offer course options that are not mainstream.

Nor is there any mention of the extent to which this comparison is affected by WA's size and widespread population.

But the 'crowning glory' is the apparent assumption that the other States are 'right' and WA is 'wrong'.

Imagine if Victoria, for example, were to look to WA in the area of road safety and say WA's fatality rate is worse than ours, so we should cut funding for road safety initiatives.

No. Where we observe differences between states we should try to understand how these arise and, where appropriate, identify ways of improving our performance. What we should not do is use difference as an excuse for regressing to the lowest common denominator.

Why Alexander Drive?

The City of Stirling has once again got its distribution wrong when it exhorts me to 'Stay in Stirling'.

The main reason for this, no doubt, is that I live in Mt Lawley, in the City of Vincent, whereas most of Mt Lawley is (for the moment) in the City of Stirling. Ironically, though, Colin Barnett's proposal would have my part of Mt Lawley moving to Stirling, despite Stirling's losing the major part that it currently has.

That got me thinking about why Alexander Drive is proposed by Colin Barnett as the boundary between the enlarged Bayswater/Bassendean and reduced Stirling local governments when it will result in yet more split suburbs.

I have previously mentioned the role of Col's pet projects in setting boundaries and I can't help but wonder if this is another example. The MAX light rail project, which, I hasten to add, I support, runs down Alexander Drive for much of its length. This will raise some potentially difficult issues not only of design for the light rail but also of development around it. If these issues can be fragmented between two Councils, the State Government will be able to play them off against each other and use any disagreements as 'justification' for taking planning out of the Councils' hands.

Keeping the Debate Alive

Perth Voice, 14th September 2013. Click to enlarge

I spoke at the Vincent Council meeting last night - and was pleased to see at first hand that it still provides the same open opportunity for people to comment or ask questions on any issue, not just those that are on the agenda, as it did when I was a councillor.

Here's what I said, in support of Mayor Alannah MacTiernan's Notice of Motion for the plebiscite:

I am a proud Vincent resident and have been since the day Vincent was established in 1994.

One of the great things about Vincent is its diversity – something celebrated on the front page of every Council Agenda and Minutes.

And the best way of acknowledging and working with diversity is to be inclusive – not dictatorial.

Personally, I want to remain a Vincent resident. But this is not about what particular future any of us sees for Vincent – it’s about those of us who live here or have businesses here having a say in that future.

Colin Barnett proposes to remove our current right to reject proposed changes if we don’t see them as being in our interests. I understand that a Bill to do this will be introduced into the Legislative Assembly this Thursday.

He cannot, however, prevent our expressing our view through a plebiscite, as proposed in this Notice of Motion. The result might not be binding – but it will send a very clear message to the Premier and the Minister for Local Government.

A number of other local governments, including at least three in Colin Barnett’s own electorate, are doing the same thing. Collectively, we have a great opportunity to assert our right to be consulted about how we are governed.

At the level of local and State government, that is called democracy. Colin Barnett proposes to remove a key element of local government democracy.

Please support this motion and allow us to tell the Premier what we think of his proposal, which is the worst possible way of achieving his objective of larger local governments.

And, whatever difficulties the Electoral Commission might put in the way, please retain all three parts of the proposed question, so that those of us who support Vincent remaining as it is, as well as those who support going to the City of Perth, can be heard.

We Get To Have Our Say

Congratulations to the City of Vincent Council, which this evening unanimously supported the Mayor's motion for a plebiscite on council amalgamations. There were changes to the form and wording of the question, to accommodate the Electoral Commission's concerns about having two different voting systems in the same election (the Council election being 'first past the post' and the plebiscite being proposed as preferential), but the integrity of the questions has been retained.

As Mayor Alannah MacTiernan said, in what was probably her last Council meeting before she resigns to take up her seat as Federal Member for Perth, the danger of trying to argue this point with the Commission was that we might well not get approval in time for the plebiscite to be at the same time as the Council election.

The plebiscite questions now look like this:

Question One: If the City of Vincent is to be abolished, what is your preferred option?

• All of the City of Vincent merges with the City of Perth; or
• City of Vincent is divided between the City of Perth and the City of Stirling [as per the State Government's proposal]

Question Two: Do you agree that the City of Vincent should be abolished? Yes/No

Whilst this plebiscite is not binding in the sense that the existing poll provision of the Local Government Act would be, it would be a great boost if it were able to achieve the requirement for a binding poll of 50% of electors voting.

With postal voting for local government elections, typically 30-35% of electors vote.

Let's get as many people voting as possible - even those who don't wish to vote in the Council election can still vote in the plebiscite - although I'd encourage them to vote in both.

At Last - A Vision for the Future

The Perth Voice has 'outed' me as a Greens supporter - probably because someone saw the 'Abbott-Proof Fence' sticker on my new front fence (I thought that was a nice touch of whimsy). The reason I support the Greens is that they're the only ones in this whole federal election campaign who have put together a comprehensive, consistent, costed and feasible vision for a sustainable future and how to achieve it. If you have the time, have a look at Scott Ludlum's presentation at http://greenswa.net.au/wa-rebooted.html.

Contrast this with the ad-hoc, short-term and often inconsistent 'promises' of the two major parties! It's the difference between giving a hungry person a fish, so that (s)he can have one meal now, and giving him/her a fishing line so that (s)he can catch fish for a lifetime.

Sure, a lot of it is formally the responsibility of State Governments (so don't hold your breath in WA), but the Federal Government often creates the context and provides at least some of the funding - and Tony Abbott is threatening (although he sees it as 'promising', for what that's worth) to destroy much of that context, for example in the area of clean energy development and funding any transport infrastructure except roads.

Marginalising Those Who Don't Drive Cars

In yet another example of the Liberals' approach to transport and road safety (following hot on the heels of Tony Abbott's statement that the Federal Government should 'stick to its knitting' and only fund road projects), we have the WA Government cutting $170,000 a year that gave pedestrians, cyclists and people with disabilities a voice, through the RAC, at the Road Safety Council.

Minister for Road Safety, Lisa Harvey, just doesn't get - but then most of her ministerial colleagues don't get process, either. The Office of Road Safety's 'work[ing] with vulnerable road user stakeholders' is not the same as their having a seat at the table where decisions are made. All credit to the RAC for taking on this role and I hope it will continue to do so, but it won't have the resources, now, to do it as well as it has done.

And while we're on the subject of funding, can Troy Buswell, as Minister for Transport and Treasurer, explain why Budget funding for bicycle infrastructure is a mere $35 million over the next four years (more than half of which was carried over from last year, anyway), when the Government's own draft WA Bicycle Network (when are we going to see the final of that, incidentally - the draft was released in March 2012 and comment closed in June 2012 - that's 15 months ago) requires that amount every year for the next decade.

Credit Where Credit's Due - Vincent Council to Consider Plebiscite

The Vincent Council Agenda for next Tuesday, 10th September 2013, includes a Notice of Motion from Mayor Alannah MacTiernan.

I congratulate her on this initiative in support of local democracy and urge all Councillors to support the motion. It is essential that, as proposed, the voting be preferential to avoid the type of problem that arose with the federal 'republic' referendum where the pro-republic vote was effectively split by the specification of the republic model.

Raindrops Keep Falling On My Web

http://www.redbubble.com/people/ttrian/works/10749114-raindrops-keep-falling-on-my-web-1

Warmest August on record and wettest for more than a decade. It's too easy to argue about what is responsible for the changing climate or to bemoan its manifestation in wet weather. Just occasionally we should do as William Henry Davies suggested when he wrote:

What is this life if, full of care,
We have no time to stand and stare.

No time to stand beneath the boughs

And stare as long as sheep or cows.

No time to see, when woods we pass,

Where squirrels hide their nuts in grass.

No time to see, in broad daylight,

Streams full of stars, like skies at night.

No time to turn at Beauty's glance,

And watch her feet, how they can dance.

No time to wait till her mouth can

Enrich that smile her eyes began.

A poor life this if, full of care,

We have no time to stand and stare.

And if we dare put our heads outside the back door on a rainy day, we might find unexpected beauty in small things.

http://www.redbubble.com/people/ttrian/works/10749088-raindrops-keep-falling-on-my-web-3

Non Sequitur … or Fallacy of the Undistributed Middle

http://jazzroc.wordpress.com/tag/uninformed

Professor Alan Robson was quoted a few weeks back as saying: "You only need to look at places like Auckland and Vancouver to know that large local governments do work". This was a masterful piece of sleight of hand (or voice), disguising what is known as the fallacy of the undistributed middle.

In essence, he was saying:
(a) Auckland and Vancouver are large local governments;
(b) Auckland and Vancouver 'work'; therefore
(c) (All) large local governments work.

We could equally well find examples of small local governments that work (even, or perhaps especially, in Perth), but I doubt that Robson (or Barnett) would want us to draw the analogous conclusion that (all) small local governments work.

Now, if he'd said "large local governments can work", he would have been correct in his use of evidence and logic - but that would leave open the fact that "small local governments can work", as well, which doesn't fit the prevailing political ideology of the Premier.

A Pre-Emptive Strike?

I know that the City of Stirling doesn't really want the part of Vincent that Colin Barnett wants to give them, so I was a little surprised to receive the Spring Edition of StirlingScene in my mailbox today. From time to time, we have received communications from the City of Stirling before, but not for a while - so is this by way of a 'welcome in advance' to current 'north-Vincent' residents? Or just another in a long line of distribution stuff-ups and waste of Stirling ratepayers' money?

Is This Vincent … or Perth?

This is the sort of quirky detail that a small local government like Vincent would value but likely to be ignored in the larger City of Perth. Both Barnett and the City of Vincent Council would have this in the City of Perth, which has so many 'big-picture' issues to deal with that the small-scale and detail can easily get overlooked.

Some Councils Get It … but not, it seems Vincent

Cottesloe, Nedlands and Mosman Park Councils have voted to hold their own referenda on the proposed forced local government amalgamations. Others are said to be considering putting in 'non-conforming' submissions or even boycotting the process.

Pity about Cambridge Mayor, Simon Withers, giving into Barnett's bullying (below). It's not a case of 'picking a fight with someone who is bigger than you' - Barnett started the fight, knowing full well that it would upset a lot of people. Sure, you choose your ground when fighting back with a bully, but a referendum is precisely the right way of standing up - and is arguably obligatory given the roles of Council and elected members set out in the Local Government Act 1995. To roll over and follow the bully's rules is to lay the basis for continued and more extreme bullying.

Post News, 31st August 2013

Appeasement Anyone?

History shows that appeasement is poor policy. Even the greatest supporters of Neville Chamberlain's 'Peace for our time' pronouncement after the Munich Conference in September 1938 have to fall back on the argument that it bought time for Britain to strengthen its armed forces and economy before the outbreak of war.

Chamberlain did, in fact, say that 'we must hope for the best but prepare for the worst'.

So just what is it that appeasement of Colin Barnett over forced local government amalgamations enables Vincent to do? How does it help the community of Vincent to prepare for the worst?

Vincent Council appears to have put all its eggs in one basket without having a Plan B.

Uncertainty Rules

The uncertainty about who will support what and under what conditions continues - but at least Perth MLA Eleni Evangel has nailed her colours to the mast (even if it isn't the mast I would prefer).

Perth Voice, 31st August 2013 (click to enlarge)