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

Saturday, August 30, 2014

Chaos or Incompetence (or both) at the LGAB?

Just one month after announcing its intention to make some 'significantly different [from original proposals] recommendations affecting Cockburn, Kwinana, Fremantle, East Fremantle, Melville and Canning, the Local Government Advisory Board has come up with yet another set of variations - and as with the previous ones has provided no justification for these changes.

As stated here on the previous occasion:


Just as with the original Ministerial proposals there is insufficient information. There is no text (other than a simple description of the changes to boundaries from the original proposals), only maps - the 'intended recommendations' that are 'significantly different from the proposals into which the LGAB inquired' do not provide the information required for a proposal in the first place. How are individuals, organisations and local Councils supposed to comment when there is no information on the basis on which the LGAB is recommending the changes?

Schedule 2.1 Clause 6 Para 2 of the Local Government Act 1995 states that the Board must afford "adequate opportunity for submissions to be made about the intended order" - surely 'adequate opportunity' must include not only time but also information. If we do not know why the LGAB is recommending these variations, how can we be said to have 'adequate opportunity' to make submissions?

As much to the point, though, this second change of mind must surely call into question the technical and professional competence of the Local Government Advisory Board to deal with such a complex situation as it has been presented with.

Compare these new intentions of the LGAB (upper maps below) with its previous versions (lower maps). One can only presume that, with respect to Cockburn (left), the LGAB has had some profound revelation about the importance of the (probably never to be built) Roe Highway Stage 8 and the existing Roe Highway, but one is forced to ask why this hadn't occurred to it before. And if Roe Highway is such an important 'natural boundary' (which arguably it is) why has the LGAB now moved Jandakot Airport into Melville despite its being virtually cut off from that local government area by Roe Highway?

The LGAB's new proposal for Melville/Canning has all the hallmarks of a simplistic 'judgement of Solomon' with none of the Wisdom of Solomon - it simply takes the middle ground between the original Melville proposal and the LGAB's initial variation on it. One thing is certain, it won't please Treasurer, Mike Nahan, as it splits his Riverton electorate down the middle too.

Cockburn: LGAB Variation 30th August 2014
Melville: LGAB Variation 30th August 2014


Cockburn: LGAB Variation 23rd July 2014
Melville: LGAB Variation 23rd July 2014















2 comments:

  1. If the residents of Bicton and Palmyra want to stay with the City of Melville and the residents of Rossmoyne, Shelley and Willetton want to stay with the City of Canning, why not let them? Why split the suburb of Willetton straight down the middle? The elderly residents of Canning in Rossmoyne Retirement Village and Herald Av centre, who have been writing letters to the Canning Times and Canning Examiner and speaking at the Fight for Canning meetings, want to retain the aged care and disability services that the City of Canning provides, so let them. They will now be writing their third submission to the LGAB. Grace.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I agree. My main issues are that (a) the whole process is both chaotic and arbitrary and (b) in very few cases will residents actually get the opportunity to vote in a binding poll - despite the clear intent of the Local Government Act.

    ReplyDelete