Lines Are Drawn

I hesitate to call them battle lines, although there is still a lot of disagreement and confrontation still to come. But at least the lines are there for all to see now - whether we agree with them or not, we now know what the Local Government Advisory Board will be assessing.

What we don't know is whether we'll get an opportunity to comment on the proposals - the Bill currently before Parliament would remove the requirement for the Local Government Advisory Board to call for submissions and allow at least six weeks for them to be made.

We also don't know whether we'll get an opportunity to vote on them. Whilst the Dadour amendment isn't currently under direct threat, the Premier and Minister have made it very clear they would like to remove that provision - but they are having difficulty getting it through the party room. To all those Liberal MPs who oppose removal, I say "Hang in there" and do what's right to preserve democracy.

I have, however, heard disturbing suggestions that the Government will argue that the Dadour amendment doesn't apply to at least some of the changes they are proposing - it all hangs on the definition of 'abolish'. I can only presume that their argument, if you can call it such, is that if the name of one amalgamated local government continues then it has not been abolished. Thus, the name City of Perth continues, so only Vincent is 'abolished' - despite the fact that the new entity would be more than twice the area and three times the population of the existing City of Perth.

This is pure sophistry, as this argument would not apply if the new local government were to have a different name. The fact is that the City of Perth as currently existing, would be abolished and a new, larger, City of Perth established in its place.

The argument also ignores the fact that the City of Perth amalgamation proposal also takes in parts of Nedlands and Subiaco - and these councils are to be abolished, which makes three - the Dadour amendment requires "2 or more" to be abolished.