This is the personal blog of Ian Ker, who was Councillor for the South Ward of the Town of Vincent from 1995 to 2009. I have been a resident of this area since 1985. This blog was originally conceived as a way of letting residents of Vincent know what I have been doing and sharing thoughts on important issues. I can now use it to sound off about things that concern me.

If you want to contact me, my e-mail is still ian_ker@hotmail.com or post a comment on this blog.

To post a comment on this blog, select the individual post on which you wish to comment, by clicking on the title in the post or in the list to the left of the blog, and scroll down to the 'Post a Comment' box at the foot.

Search This Blog

Monday, March 17, 2014

Curious…

In his second reading speech on the Local Government Amendment Bill, currently before the Legislative Council, the Minister for Local Government said:
As a result of the planned metropolitan reforms, the Advisory Board will soon be required to deal with a large number of proposals relating to local government reform. The Bill will provide the Board with the ability to hold combined inquiries where two or more proposals are related. 

This is contained in section 12 of the Bill, which introduces a new clause 4A to Schedule 2.1 of the Local Government Act, 1995.

This implies that the LGAB does not currently have the ability to hold combined inquiries and, since the Bill is still in the Parliament and there is no provision for this to be retroactive, the 34 proposals currently before the Board will have to be dealt with individually. This will make it virtually impossible for the Board to consider any but the Minister's proposals, as most others are not mutually compatible, having inconsistencies and overlaps - and if the Board were to make a recommendation on one of them it would have implications in terms of judging others.

Does this mean that the LGAB could dismiss most, if not all, of the non-Ministerial proposals on the grounds that it does not have the legal ability to consider them properly?

If so, has the LGAB been negligent or in breach of the Act in accepting these proposals for consideration?

1 comment:

  1. Thank you Ian for this update on the LGAB's handling of proposals. The Minister's proposals should have been rejected. The 12 two-page proposals plus a photo were flimsy, lacked reasons and effects, and were not of sufficient detail for the public to scrutinise.

    ReplyDelete