25,000 Submissions

Even allowing for 'form' submissions, that's a lot of submissions for the Local Government Advisory Board to 'consider' as required by the Local Government Act. According to the announced timeline, the LGAB is due to report to the Minister by the end of June 2014 - ie it has just over three months to undertake its considerations.

If, say, half the submissions are form submissions and can be dealt with expeditiously (but without downplaying their value), that leaves the LGAB having to consider 200 individual submissions a day.

The complexity of the proposals, including overlaps and contradictions, makes this a daunting task and one I do not envy the LGAB for having.

Where, however, does this leave the 'late' proposals submitted as part of the submission process, including those from the City of Subiaco? The LGAB cannot consider them as part of this current process, as they have not been put out for the required six weeks for submissions - nor, surely, can it put them out for submissions while it is considering proposals that have already attracted 25,000 submissions.

Q5 How Can We Get Rid Of You?

The late Tony Benn, doyen or destroyer (depending on your point of view) of the Labour left in the United Kingdom, famously asked five questions of the powerful.

Messrs Barnett and Abbott would do well to ponder these questions (especially the first three) and reflect on their arrogant behaviour, for many are already reflecting on the fourth and will, at the earliest possible opportunity, provide our own answers to the fifth.

A Slip of the Tongue?

Spotted in the Minister for Local Government's media release today (http://www.mediastatements.wa.gov.au/pages/StatementDetails.aspx?listName=StatementsBarnett&StatId=8164)?

Mr Simpson also praised the 16 local governments who are pressing ahead with reform by forming local implementation committees, made up of elected members and senior management from two or more local governments involved in a possible merger to drive the transition process.

Note the use of the word 'merger'- not boundary adjustment! Could this be a turning point in the argument over how the proposed changes have been specified in the government proposals to evade the Dadour poll provisions?

It is to be hoped that the Minister realises that Local Governments not on this list are not necessarily trying to subvert his process. I understand that the City of Vincent has been trying to set up a local implementation committee with the City of Perth, but has been rebuffed - partly on the not unreasonable grounds that there are at least two very different proposals still being assessed.

If You Can't Stand The Heat, Minister, Get Out Of The Kitchen

Local Government Minister, Tony 'Homer' Simpson, 
accuses Councils of spreading "blatant lies" and "scaremongering".

This is in obvious contrast to the total lack of any information from the WA Government on the reasons for or the costs and benefits of the various local government amalgamations (or 'boundary adjustments') it is attempting to force on local communities.

Does it not even occur to the Minister that a modicum of 'correct' information would show up the 'blatant lies' for what they are?

Apparently it does not. Homer prefers that we take the Government's case on trust and his assertion of Council "lies" with blind faith.

Or could it be that the statements from Councils and others are not lies after all.

I have been to quite a few community meetings on proposed amalgamations and have been presented with information that certainly appears credible. If Homer wants to convince me that this information is "lies" and "scaremongering", he needs to do more than simply say so.

At most of these meetings, person after person has stood up and said, in one way or another, "I am a life-long Liberal voter, but there is no way I'll be voting Liberal at the next State election". Even if Barnett and Simpson don't care about this, others in the Liberal and National Parties ought to, if they value their political futures. Now is the time for them to stand up and be counted, before this house of cards collapses around them.

Not So Much A Meeting As A Lecture

Whilst it was good to see the turnout at the 'Town Hall Meeting' on Sunday 9th March, I was disappointed that there was no opportunity for input from the community. Town Hall Meetings, almost by definition, should be meetings rather than orations. To the best of my knowledge, there is an expectation that attendees generally may voice their opinions and ask questions at a Town hall Meeting.

I know, from talking with others after the meeting, that I was not the only one to feel this way.

I enjoyed Mayor John Carey's impassioned pleas - and was pleased to see that the option of retaining Vincent as it is was back on the agenda and is included in the Vincent website where it provides information to assist people to make comments on the various proposals.

I wasn't impressed with former Mayor Alannah MacTiernan, who still seems to be finding it difficult to overcome her vociferous opposition to the creation of Vincent in 1994 - and hasn't caught up with the clear message from the community - Keep Vincent Alive.

Muddying The Waters

The Local Government Advisory Board, in its infinite (lack of ) wisdom, has added two new Subiaco proposals (one of which affects Vincent) to its list of proposals to be considered. These proposals were not approved by Subiaco Council until 13th February and the specific one affecting the City of Vincent (by seeking incorporation into the City of Perth's proposal) was described as being made "under perceived duress" - so I'm not sure how serious it was.

This particular proposal could have the benefit of triggering the Dadour poll provision, but for that very reason is unlikely to be recommended by the LGAB. In which case it is simply an exercise in muddying the waters.

The LGAB does state that the process from here would "include the opportunity for the public to make submissions to the Board on the new proposals", but I am concerned that this is likely to slip under most people's radar.

I guess comments should basically be the same as for the City of Perth's proposal, with the added comment that the City of Subiaco had not discussed this with the City of Vincent or the Vincent community.

Yet another example of confused process. The LGAB stated a closing date for proposals - I would have thought the LGAB should assess the proposals it already has rather than adding to them in this ad hoc way. 

It is quite possible that having additional proposals, not previously even suggested, might affect the submissions people have made on the original proposals.

And can the LGAB possibly start to assess other proposals affecting Subiaco, Vincent or Perth until after the closure of the comment period on this new Subiaco proposal?

Is there now a new 'closing date' for proposals? Or can we simply keep adding proposal after proposal?

Should the City of Vincent put in a new proposal that is simply 'Hands Off Vincent', which we know is the preferred option of those electors who voted in the plebiscite?

Conflicts of Interest?

If the Local Government Advisory Board were a local government, members would have to declare an interest and not participate in debate or voting on proposals affecting or raised by their specific local governments or by their employer. I am hoping this is the case for the LGAB as well.

This could lead to some interesting shuffling of seats. In some instances, they might not even have a quorum.

In drawing attention to this, I am not in any way implying any lack of integrity in any of the members of the LGAB. I am merely drawing attention to clear conflicts of interest and expressing the hope that these will be dealt with in the same open and transparent way as is required of local governments themselves.

The LGAB Chairman, Cr Mel Congerton, is a Councillor for the City of Swan - and should, therefore, not participate in debate or voting on the following proposals:

1	Shire of Mundaring
2	City of Swan and Town of Bassendean
6	City of Bayswater
8	City of Belmont
15	Shire of Kalamunda
03/2013	Minister for Local Government - Bayswater/Bassendean
04/2013	Minister for Local Government - Swan/Mundaring
05/2013	Minister for Local Government - Belmont/Kalamunda

The two LGAB members from the Department of Local Government and Communities should not participate in debate or vote on any of the proposals from the Minister for Local Government, to whom they are ultimately responsible, nor on any of the alternative proposals addressing all or part of the same local governments. DLGC staff do not normally have a conflict of interest, as proposals have come from local governments rather than from the Minister, but this situation is clearly exceptional.

Mayor Ron Yurevich and his deputy, Cr Karen Chapple, are from non-metropolitan local governments so have no apparent conflicts of interest.

Cr Helen Dullard is the President of the Shire of Mundaring - and should not participate in debate or vote on the following proposals:

1	Shire of Mundaring
2	City of Swan and Town of Bassendean
04/2013	Minister for Local Government - Swan/Mundaring

Cr Dullard's deputy, Cr Richard Smith, is Deputy Mayor of the City of Rockingham - and should not participate in debate nor vote on the following proposal:

21	Shire of Serpentine-Jarrahdale

Dr Shayne Silcox is CEO of the City of Melville and takes the prize for the most conflicts of interest (other than the DLGC representatives) - and should not participate in debate nor vote on the following proposals:

7	City of Canning
9	City of Melville (1)
10	City of Melville (2)
12	City of Fremantle
18	City of Gosnells
07/2013	Minister for Local Government - Canning/Gosnells
08/2013	Minister for Local Government - Melville
09/2013	Minister for Local Government - Fremantle/East Fremantle
10/2013	Minister for Local Government - Cockburn/Kwinana
E1	Cockburn Community Steering Committee

Shayne Silcox's deputy, Mark Chester, is CEO of the Shire of Dardanup and has no apparent conflicts of interest.

Everybody Knows - But Who Feels Able To Act?

In the immortal (if somewhat depressing) words of Leonard Cohen, Everybody Knows.

Everybody knows that the dice are loaded

Everybody rolls with their fingers crossed

Everybody knows that the war is over

Everybody knows the good guys lost

Everybody knows the fight was fixed

The poor stay poor, the rich get rich

That's how it goes

Everybody knows

Everybody knows that the boat is leaking

Everybody knows that the captain lied

Everybody got this broken feeling

Like their father or their dog just died

The real question is why so few feel able to act. Perhaps LC is right - we've all got "this broken feeling" - but if we don't stand up to be counted we connive at our own demise. 

Canning Community Cares

Last night, I attended a rally at the City of Canning. I'm very bad at estimating numbers, but for what it's worth I'd say there were 600 or so people there - Canning citizens who care about the future of their City.

I was very impressed at the way in which the Commissioner for the City of Canning, Lynton Reynolds, acknowledged his personal view that some local government reform through amalgamation was desirable but said this had to be subservient to the oath he swore when taking office, which was to faithfully serve the people of the district.

Commissioners often get a bad rap - including from me - but credit where credit is due. Thank you, Lynton, from those of us elsewhere, for having the integrity to tell it like it is.

I don't agree with his assessment that there is no chance of a plebiscite - there is much water to run under that particular bridge yet.

But whatever one's views on amalgamations as such, the information provided by the Commissioner and the CEO, Lyn Russell, makes it clear that dismemberment of the City of Canning makes no sense in the Government's own stated terms - as it stands, the City of Canning meets all the stated criteria for size, financial viability and sustainability, so why split it into four with each part going to a different Council?

Lynton used the analogy of a hostile company takeover, as I have done previously on this blog. In this case, he described it as a hostile takeover by a consortium of four other local governments. In the corporate world, the proponents of the takeover would have to provide clear information about the effects of the takeover - but there has been no such information in this case. It would then be for the Board of the target company to recommend whether shareholders accept or reject the bid. The Commissioner's judgement was clearly stated: that the takeover bid be rejected.

Perhaps the most telling arguments came from the people of Canning themselves. Canning has developed a very hands-on approach to community services, especially aged care and disability services - very different from any of the local governments that could takeover parts of the City. People who rely on these services are vulnerable and are rightly fearful of what their future might be if they are (a) split up and (b) absorbed by a local government with a different philosophy.

For the Future - Nationally and in WA

Scott Ludlum made a once-in-a-lifetime speech in the Senate yesterday. Unfortunately only one other senator was there, but the video has gone viral (over 360,000 views at the time of writing). I encourage you to watch it and listen carefully.

Why is this important in the context of this blog? you might ask.

Well, it's important because it's about the future - about our future and our community's future. It's about respect - for people and process. It's about values. And it's about our responsibility to create a sustainable future for ourselves and our children.

It's important because the only political party that has consistently stood up for the rights of individuals and communities to have a say in the future of their local governments has been the Greens WA.

It's important because most of the Abbott traits Scott talks about can equally be used to describe Colin Barnett - especially arrogance and evidence-denial.

At rallies and meetings during the so-called local government reform process, I have heard speaker after speaker say "I am a life-long Liberal voter, but I will not be voting Liberal at the next State election". By their arrogance and intransigence, both Barnett and Abbott have alienated an incredibly large part of the 'liberal-conservative' vote.

So I am confident, along with Scott, that this government is a purely temporary phenomenon - at both federal and state levels.

Open Letter to Vincent Council

Dear Mayor Carey

I am sure you will not be surprised to hear than I am extremely disappointed that the information on the flier for Sunday's Town Hall Meeting is not consistent with Council's own position nor the motion passed at the last Council meeting (25th February), which stated:

"Ensure such information [on the website, admittedly, but the principle surely applies here, too] reflects the City’s position on amalgamation from 5 November 2013 and overwhelming majority view on the plebiscite of 19 October 2013 for Vincent to remain its own Local Government entity."

The Council resolution of 5 November 2013 "recognised the local community’s first preference, based on the results of the City of Vincent plebiscite (held on 19 October 2013) and ongoing community feedback, that the City of Vincent remain as its own local government entity".

The first point in the box of 'submission points' on the flier should, therefore, be along the lines of 'Keep Vincent as it is' - not only on the basis of community views but also because no substantial arguments have been made for it to disappear. The points already there should, correspondingly, be qualified with the words 'If Vincent is not kept as a separate local government…'.

I am concerned that Vincent Council has fallen into the trap of passive negativity by focussing on what it regards as achievable rather than what the community really wants. If submissions to the LGAB simply state what is on the flier, the best outcome achievable is that the whole of Vincent merges with Perth as equals. Whilst this is a better outcome than that proposed by the State Government, it is not the preferred outcome of the Vincent Community.

And for those who still maintain that the community's preferred outcome is not achievable, I simply say "If you don't ask, you won't get".

Regards

Ian Ker

HELP!!!!!!!!!!!

God (or someone) help us - for we truly live in interesting times (as the ancient Chinese curse goes).

On top of the heavy workload of a Premier, not to mention keeping the pressure on Local Government Minister, Tony 'Homer' Simpson, on local government amalgamation, Col Pot is now taking on two of the biggest portfolios in government.

I wonder if this says more about Barnett's egomania or the lack of capability in the rest of the Liberal and National Parties.

And is there more behind the Buswell 'personal leave' than we are being told?

Personally, I'd like to wish Troy Buswell all the best - and hope he gets back into the ministerial saddle soon - as he has been one of the few performers in this shambles of a government.

Hyde Park Fair - As It Should Be

Away from the stresses of local government forced amalgamations, it has been a real joy to see the Hyde Park Fair back to what it should be this year. Not so long ago, the Fair had descended in to commercialism, but this year there was a great community feel about it. Thanks to all at the North Perth Rotary Club.

The atmosphere was no doubt helped by the fact that, for the first time in years, there was actually a reasonable amount of water in the lakes - and this despite record-low summer rainfall.
Congratulations to the City of Vincent for the vast improvement. A cooling breeze across the park worked well, too, but I wouldn't give Vincent the credit for that.

The layout of the Fair also contributed, as most stalls were set out around the lake and on only the lakeside of the path. This made it much easier to walk around, as there was less need for people to cross the path, and it also had a much more open feel to it.

Well done to the parents of Perth College who ran a secondhand bookstall with all proceeds going to the Sunshine House Orphanage in Cambodia. With good quality books at just one dollar, my resolve not to put even more pressure on my already-groaning bookshelves was overcome.

Also good to see the Greens there - apparently the only party that sees community events such as this as a worthwhile way of relating to the community. I had a long chat with Robin Chapple, MLC for the Mining and Pastoral Region. Local government is one of Robin's policy areas and he assured me that the Greens were not at all happy with the government's approach to local government amalgamations - and that cracks were appearing in the government ranks - but that no one was willing to cross the floor and vote against the Local Government Amendment Bill - beats me how you can speak against a Bill and then vote for it.

Congratulations James - Or Should It Be Commiserations

Congratulations to our newly-elected Vincent Councillor, James Peart, although I fear it is somewhat of a poisoned chalice he has won.

James will have to come to grips quickly with some very important and difficult issues, and I wish him all the best. 

The low turnout is rather a worry, although I guess that the people of WA are getting weary of elections - and there is yet another one in just over a month.

Bayswater Just Wants To Grab Anything It Can

This is the fifth of five posts that will carry my submissions to the Local Government Advisory Board. I publish them in the hope that they will help others make informed submissions

It is important that we comment on all five proposals that affect Vincent, to ensure that none of the proposals goes by default, but also because each is an opportunity to state that our preferred outcome is for Vincent to remain as it is.

State Gov't Sends Banks To Bayswater For Unstated Reasons

This is the fourth of five posts that will carry my submissions to the Local Government Advisory Board. I publish them in the hope that they will help others make informed submissions

It is important that we comment on all five proposals that affect Vincent, to ensure that none of the proposals goes by default, but also because each is an opportunity to state that our preferred outcome is for Vincent to remain as it is.

City Of Vincent Doesn't Respect Community Wishes

This is the third of five posts that will carry my submissions to the Local Government Advisory Board. I publish them in the hope that they will help others make informed submissions

It is important that we comment on all five proposals that affect Vincent, to ensure that none of the proposals goes by default, but also because each is an opportunity to state that our preferred outcome is for Vincent to remain as it is.

State Government Wants To Exclude Banks As Well As To Abolish Vincent

This is the second of five posts that will carry my submissions to the Local Government Advisory Board. I publish them in the hope that they will help others make informed submissions

It is important that we comment on all five proposals that affect Vincent, to ensure that none of the proposals goes by default, but also because each is an opportunity to state that our preferred outcome is for Vincent to remain as it is.

City of Perth Just Wants Our Assets

This is the first of five posts that will carry my submissions to the Local Government Advisory Board. I publish them in the hope that they will help others make informed submissions

It is important that we comment on all five proposals that affect Vincent, to ensure that none of the proposals goes by default, but also because each is an opportunity to state that our preferred outcome is for Vincent to remain as it is.

Ignoring Dadour - At Your Peril

The City of Vincent flier for its Town Hall Meeting on Sunday March 9th at 1pm says a lot of good and relevant things about the need to keep Vincent together and for any amalgamations to be a 'merger of equals'. It does not, however, reflect the Council's own stated position "that the City of Vincent remain as its own local government entity" (5th November, 2013), which is also the position favoured by the vast majority of those who voted in the poll last October.

Unfortunately, it fails to mention one of the most critical consequences of the State Government's describing the changes as 'boundary adjustment' rather than amalgamation - that is that it removes the right of the electors of Vincent to call for a binding poll on whatever proposal the Local Government Advisory Board recommends (the so-called 'Dadour amendment').

This would be the only effective opportunity most people would have to reject any proposal and to say (as the vast majority did in the poll last October) that Vincent should remain as it is.

Liberal MLC and former Minister, Simon O'Brien, recently called attention to this in the Legislative Council, when he also said it 'would be interesting' to see if this approach would stand up in court.

This is an issue that has almost been ignored by most of the media, with attention being focussed on the detail of proposed changes rather than the democratic principles that are being trampled in the dust by this ideologue of a Premier for whom the ends apparently justify the means.

We can only hope that the transparently anti-democratic nature of his chosen means will quickly spell the end for this Premier and his minion Minister for Local Government - before the rest of us are left having to pick up the pieces of shattered communities.