Confusion

Click to enlarge

Lots of apparent confusion about the Nationals intentions in relation to Col's proposed City of Perth Act, but the West has put it up front and centre . However, Terry Redman is still saying the Nats “'reserve our right' to take a position on any piece of legislation that may or may not come before the House".

As far as local councils and their communities are concerned, an Act of Parliament that does not include a right for them to have a say, consistent with the Local Government Act, is still a forced amalgamation.

The challenge is now to keep the Nationals to their commitment to oppose forced local government amalgamations, however they are proposed to be achieved.

Saving the Banks Precinct

Whatever happens in the legal action or with Barnett's proposed City of Perth Act, the Banks precinct will stay with the rest of Vincent.

The Minister has accepted the LGAB recommendation with respect to Bayswater that includes two changes to the Bayswater proposal in the Banks area:

1. Retention of the Banks precinct in the City of Vincent; and

2. Transferring land bounded by Ellesmere Street, Mitchell Street, Stanley Street and Guildford Road from Bayswater to the City of Vincent (see map, right). 

A small but important victory for common sense.

Eleni: Vincent Voters Are Two Thirds of Your Electors

I took the opportunity (sadly unlikely to get such opportunity under City of Perth, if that comes to pass) to speak to the City of Vincent Council last night, in advance of the 'closed door' briefing of Mayors, Presidents and CEOs. Text below.

At the time, I didn't know about the vote in the Lower House - but this simply reinforces what I said.

Twelve months ago, nearly four out of five people who voted in the Vincent plebiscite said Vincent should not be abolished.

I suggest that would have been five out of five if they had been told that merging with the City of Perth would make them second-class citizens.

And yet that is precisely what Colin Barnett is now proposing – in order to salvage something from the wreck of his local government so-called reform.

So fearful is he that the Supreme Court will declare the whole process invalid, that he is attempting to pre-empt the Court by saying he will introduce a City of Perth Act to get what he always wanted for the City of Perth – a capital city bloated with assets stolen from surrounding communities.

To make this ‘work’ on his terms, he will put a Bjelke-Peterson Queensland-style gerrymander in place to disenfranchise the people of Vincent. After all, as he said last week, “you would not want residential voters to be able to control the central business district”.

What a gross denial of democracy – simply to protect property and business interests in the Perth CBD. This is on top of the existing weighting that already allows a ‘body corporate’ to have two votes.

I urge you, Mr Mayor, to ‘maintain the rage’ (to use the words of the late Gough Whitlam)when you attend the ‘closed-door’ briefing tomorrow.

If the opportunity arises, I beg you to move a motion of no-confidence in the Premier for his anti-democratic stance.

But the Premier still has to get his Act through Parliament – and he has already had a defeat in the Upper House on forced amalgamations.

It's time (There are Gough's words again) to remind Eleni Evangel, MLA for Perth, that her electorate includes the City of Vincent as well as the City of Perth.

It's time to remind her that two-thirds of her electors are Vincent residents.

The people of Vincent will not forgive her at the 2017 election if she doesn’t vote against Barnett's latest denial of democracy - or better still persuade him to give up his latest imperial delusion.

We should be forcibly reminding state parliamentarians that the WA Electoral Act requires one-vote one-value for state electorates.

We should be forcibly reminding them that the Local Government Act requires "the ratio of councillors to electors" to be a key factor in the establishment of wards.

Most of all, we should be forcibly reminding them that to vote for Col’s gerrymander would be a gross dereliction of their democratic duty and would see them held to account at the next state election.

Weasel Words Again

Barnett says "reforms not intended as an attack on local government". Your nose is growing like Pinnocchio's, Col.

Breaking News: A Dog's Breakfast

The decisions on the LGAB recommendations are a total dog's breakfast.

Three amalgamations get a vote - but other straight mergers (eg Subiaco/Cambridge; Belmont/Kalamunda) are described as 'boundary changes' so no vote. Total inconsistency.

Simpson has given guarantee of no vote weighting in City of Perth/City of Vincent legislation. Wonder if he has checked this Barnett? If so, this is a huge backdown given Barnett's statement last week that "you wouldn't want residents to control the cbd".

According to the ABC, Barnett has said he will not move on the regions in this term of government. This sounds very like his pre-2013 election commitment of "no forced amalgamations" so if I were the Nationals I'd be even more worried than ever.

New Map of Local Government

New map according to Barnett and Simpson - thanks to Gareth Parker for tweeting this.

No real surprises here, but all a sideshow when the Supreme Court rules.

Constitutional Contravention

First the Legislative Council votes against Barnett on local government. Now the Legislative Assembly has done so. http://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2014-10-21/wa-govt-loses-motion-over-local-council-amalgamations/5831462

The cracks are becoming veritable chasms (http://ianrker-vincent.blogspot.com.au/2014/10/cracks-becoming-chasms.html).

Mark McGowan is quoted by the ABC as saying :"If the Government goes ahead with a plan that doesn't involve a local say, or does involve legislation without mandate, it is therefore defying the will of Parliament".

Barnett, in the Parliament yesterday, denied that this is so.

It is quite possible that the situation would actually be more dire for the Government than simply defying the will of Parliament as it becomes a constitutional issue.

The WA Constitution Act (Section 52 para 1) states:

52. Elected local governing bodies

(1) The Legislature shall maintain a system of local governing bodies elected and constituted in such manner as the Legislature may from time provide.

Whilst there is nothing in this preventing the delegation of this responsibility (as it has done through the Local Government Act, 1995), a similar resolution of both houses of the Parliament should be interpreted as constraining any such delegation.

Col Pot, Kettle and Black

We have come not to expect graciousness from Colin Barnett, but some of his comments on the late Gough Whitlam today sink to a new low.

As well as showing Colin's usual ungraciousness, his comments are a classic example of (Col) Pot calling Kettle Black.

Col says that Gough shouldn't be remembered as a great Prime Minister (despite saving him from having to go to fight in Vietnam) because:

- "A lot of the things he set out to do didn't really work". Well, Col, what about things like shark drum lines and local government so-called reform in your own backyard?

- "His grand spending programs didn't really come off". Well, Col, what about things like the Burswood Stadium, Elizabeth Quay and the Airport rail link that have cost WA its AAA credit rating?

- "He ended up with a government in chaos". Well, Col, he was only defeated in the Senate thanks to the bastardry of the Queensland and NSW premiers. You have been defeated in both Houses of the WA Parliament due to the dissatisfaction of members of your own party.

So, Col, perhaps you should think a little more carefully before criticising others.

Cracks Becoming Chasms

First Barnett had the numbers to emasculate an Opposition motion critical of the Barnett/Simpson local government so-called reform process in the Legislative Assembly (http://ianrker-vincent.blogspot.com.au/2014/09/almost-but-not-quite.html).

Then he lost a similar motion on the voices in the Legislative Council, because he didn't dare put it to a formal vote, knowing that some Liberal MPs would cross the floor (http://ianrker-vincent.blogspot.com.au/2014/09/more-cracks-and-not-just-in-facade.html).

And now, today, Barnett doesn't even have the numbers in the Legislative Assembly and is forced to allow a motion calling for a guarantee that local government amalgamations would not be forced to pass without a formal vote.

I congratulate those Liberal MLAs who have presumably made it clear to Col Pot that what he is doing is not acceptable in a democratic society.

Cracks become chasms and the imperial statue that Colin Barnett erected to himself is about to come toppling down - joining those of other dictators from Stalin to Saddam Hussein.

People Have The Power!

Misleading Parliament or Just Shafted By Barnett?

On 15th October, Local Government Minister, Tony Simpson, stated, in response to a question from David Templeman, Labor spokesman on Local Government, that "The Premier is very happy with its [the Local Government Advisory Board's] recommendations - we had a long discussion about it - and cabinet as well".

Just two days later, Colin Barnett announced that he would introduce special legislation to get what he wanted for the City of Perth (http://ianrker-vincent.blogspot.com.au/2014/10/more-sociopathic-behaviour-from-col-pot.html).

This raises an interesting question. Did Simpson mislead the Parliament in his answer to David Templeman's question or did Colin Barnett not tell Simpson, who is the Minister responsible for local government under Parliamentary statute, what he was intending to do?

The answer to one part or the other of this question must be 'yes'. In the first case, Simpson should resign. In the second, Barnett should resign.

Whose Response Will It Be?

No prizes for guessing the answer.

Simpson said initially that he would support all the LGAB recommendations. Then Barnett announced his grand gerrymander plan for the City of Perth and Vincent.

Presumably the delay in making the announcement is the result of finding a way of letting Simpson save some dignity in the face of the Barnett jackboot.

I'd love to be the proverbial 'fly on the wall' at the 'closed briefing' - not so much to hear the announcement, which we'll all get 'after' 11am (assuming all goes according to plan), but to hear the responses of the assembled Mayors, Presidents and CEOs.

Lest We Forget - Remember Who Elects You, Eleni

Amidst all the justifiable anger about Col Pot's proposing to change the game and put in a gerrymander to disadvantage Vincent residents and ratepayers, we must not forget that, just a year ago, nearly 80% of those who voted in the Vincent plebiscite stated categorically that they did not want the City of Vincent to be abolished (http://ianrker-vincent.blogspot.com.au/2013/10/electors-want-to-keep-vincent.html).

It is time to remind Eleni Evangel, MLA for Perth, that her electorate includes the City of Vincent as well as the City of Perth and that two-thirds of her electors are Vincent residents. The people of Vincent will not forgive her at the 2017 election if she does not vote against Barnett's latest denial of democracy - or better still persuade Barnett to give up his latest grand imperial delusion.

No Taxation Without Equal Representation

Col Pot has said he will introduce a Bill for a City of Perth Act that will include a blatant gerrymander because "you [by which he means himself] wouldn't want residential voters to be able to control the central business district".

The WA Electoral Act insists that the number of electors for each state electoral district should be as near equal as practicably possible.

The Local Government Act requires that "the ratio of councillors to electors" to be considered in the establishment of wards. Any reasonable interpretation of this, especially in view of the 'superior' legislation (the WA Electoral Act) must be that there should be consistency across all wards of a local government - and, indeed, this is the case in metropolitan local governments that have wards.

Why should the electors of the City of Vincent have to put up with anything less.

Revolutions have been held to uphold the principle of equal representation.

More Sociopathic Behaviour From Col Pot

Col Pot doesn't like the LGAB recommendations for the City of Perth and City of Vincent, so he is picking up his bat and ball and going to play a game with new rules that suit him.

Alternatively, he is convinced the legal action against the Minister and the LGAB will succeed, so he's moving on to Plan B (or should that be Plan C, D, E ………… - he's changed tack so many times it's difficult to keep track).

Not only that, but he has brazenly stated that he wants to put a Bjelke-Peterson Queensland-style gerrymander in place to ensure that the majority of ratepayers in the new City of Perth would not have the opportunity to elect the majority of councillors.

Do I see a 'one-vote, one-value' legal action coming on - or, failing that, a 'no taxation without (equal) representation' community action that might include rates strikes.

Whatever the merits or otherwise of amalgamating Perth and Vincent (plus UWA and QEII), surely our members of Parliament will understand the importance of at least reasonably equal representation.

The irony, for me personally, is that if the current legal action succeeds, as seems increasingly likely, the only community to lose out might well be the City of Vincent.

Tony Can't Take a Trick

Local Government Minister, Tony 'Homer' Simpson, has been forced to delay the release of the Local Government Advisory Board report on metropolitan local government so-called reform proposals because he knows that drawing attention to it could cost the Liberals the seat of Vasse in Saturday's by-election.

Deny it all he might, the fact of the matter is that the Nationals have clearly differentiated themselves from what Barnett and Simpson are doing in the metropolitan area - and Simpson has publicly stated that country WA is next for the same treatment.

Of course, if he hadn't made the whole process so complex by continually shifting his ground and alienating people across WA (both metro and country) in the process, he might have been able to release the report more in line with his original 'timetable' - but that timetable was, itself, a huge piece of arrogance that assumed people would simply go along with what he and Col were trying to force on us.

More Costs of Forced Amalgamations

Barnett and Simpson claim they want Councils to work with each other - as well as to merge with each other (sorry - 'adjust their boundaries').

Since many Councils are already working with each other, through formal and informal arrangements, all of those arrangements have to be reviewed if the local government structure changes. So, as well as existing Council administrations having to be force-fitted together, there is a substantial cost of making the regional structures fit with the new Council boundaries.

Added to which, while it is prudent to anticipate change, all this is still hypothetical - the cost will be incurred in pursuit of an as-yet unknown set of changes that will quite likely not eventuate.

More Amalgamation Short-Sightedness - And, Yes, It's Col Again

Click to enlarge

Inner-urban living was once the preserve of yuppies and DINKS (Double-Income No Kids), but has become more attractive to families as well. This means more pressure on education facilities in those areas - as I drew attention to here back in 2008 (http://ianrker-vincent.blogspot.com.au/2008/03/where-will-they-go-to-school.html).

Not too many years earlier, Colin Barnett, then Education Minister, amalgamated the Hollywood and Swanbourne High Schools into Shenton College, on the grounds that the two individual schools were 'too small' and that the single larger school would be able to offer more and better educational options to students.

The State Government also closed Scarborough (1999) and City Beach (2005) High Schools

Now we have a need to accommodate up to 2500 extra high school students in the area in the next decade and the Education Department is investigating options to increase accommodation at Churchlands, Mt Lawley and Shenton College, with Churchlands likely to double from 1500 to 3000 students 'in the next few years'. Three thousand students is horrendously large and endangers both learning outcomes and social development - large schools have negative effects on student identification with schools and, thus, participation and affiliation (http://www.edb.utexas.edu/hsns/HSNSbrief1.pdf).

A recent study of school size and learning outcomes in the USA concluded:

"the ideal high school, defined in terms of effectiveness (i.e., learning), enrolls between 600 and 900 students. In schools smaller than this, students learn less; those in large high schools (especially over 2,100) learn considerably less. Learning is more equitable in very small schools, with equity defined by the relationship between learning and student socioeconomic status (SES)." http://epa.sagepub.com/content/19/3/205.abstract

So yet again, Col, bigger is not better. It might be cheaper (although that is by no means proven - sounds familiar to those of us concerned about your local government merger-mania) but, even if it is, it is short-sighted economy - the proverbial 'spoiling the ship for a ha'porth of tar'.

Will you ever learn? It seems not, judging by the report in the West Australia back in June.

Click to enlarge

And it should be of more than passing interest that the negative effect of larger schools on student achievement is substantially stronger where there is disadvantage and poverty  (http://www.saveourschools.com.au/file_download/2). And where are Col's implied mergers? Lockridge, Swan View, Balga, Warwick, Balcatta and Mirrabooka: Lockridge, Balga and Mirrabooka are in the 10% most disadvantaged suburbs in WA; Girrawheen is in the 20% most disadvantaged; and Swan View, Balcatta and Clarkson are in the 40% most disadvantaged. Only Warwick is among the less disadvantaged suburbs. 
[Source: Australian Bureau of Statistics, Socio-economic Indexes for Areas by suburb - http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/subscriber.nsf/log?openagent&2033.0.55.001%20ssc%20indexes.xls&2033.0.55.001&Data%20Cubes&F40D0630B245D5DCCA257B43000EA0F1&0&2011&05.04.2013&Latest]

Need one say more?

De-Amalgamation Call on Col's Political Doorstep

Click to enlarge

We all know of the de-amalgamations of local governments in Queensland after mergers forced by the previous state government there, but now here's a de-amalgamation call here in WA - from an amalgamated entity created by Col himself less than a year ago.

Okay - it's not a straight reversion to the former state that Synergy wants, but it does seem to be the case that economies of scale aren't all they're cracked up to be by Col, after all.

If Col and Homer get their way, how long before there are calls for de-amalgamating local governments here in Perth?

The Problem With Elections

It has rightly been said that the problem with representative democracy is that no matter who you vote for you always end up electing a politician. The Bonzo Dog Doo-Dah Band said this in a slightly different way in a song recorded in 1988, when Margaret Thatcher was the UK Prime Minister - although the record wasn't in fact released until the 1992 Election, by which time Thatcher had been replaced by John Major.

From Joe Public's point of view, the problem is not, as some have drawn attention to, the low level of participation in political parties but the total absence of opportunities to directly influence decision-making between elections.

In some places in the world, there is provision for ballots to be held to determine issues (eg many States of the USA and the Cantons of Switzerland), but these are often restricted to occasions when elections are being held and are, in any case, too cumbersome to deal with urgent and important issues.

There is, however, a burgeoning virtual community around the development of electronic petitions for a whole range of purposes, but electronic petitions do not meet the current requirements for presentation to, never mind being debated in, state or federal Parliaments in Australia.

However, the UK Government has put in place a formal process to co-ordinate petitions to Government/Parliament and to allow those that get sufficient support to be debated in the House of Commons. In the two years since this system was put in place, 7.2 million people have signed one or more petitions on the site and 19 of those petitions have been debated in the UK Parliament, having achieved the required 100,000 signatures.

On the basis of relative population, this is equivalent to 35,000 signatories in Australia or 3,500 in Western Australia.

The UK system could, no doubt, be improved - for example, I'd like to see "could be debated" changed to "will be debated", with a guarantee of at least half a day of parliamentary time and a vote.

Complex issues, especially those that have strong technical and emotional aspects, do not easily lend themselves direct democracy. Electronic petitions and a formal process for dealing with them would, however, at least provide an avenue for having them addressed in a public and transparent way.

Getting Ahead of Themselves - City of Bayswater

Click to enlarge

I received this letter (right) from the City of Bayswater on Friday - interesting that it took two weeks to get to me.

Although the letter is generic, the envelope was addressed to me personally. I don't know how the City of Bayswater got my address, but I presume the address label was affixed by Carers WA, who do have my details on their database.

I find it interesting, though, that the City of Bayswater, which presumably specified the distribution, appears to consider that Mt Lawley is in already in the City of Bayswater. Not only is none of Mt Lawley currently in Bayswater, but even under the City of Bayswater proposal to the LGAB only half the suburb would be in Bayswater.

Anyone following local government so-called reform will know that the City of Bayswater has been a strong supporter of its own expansion from the start, but this seems to be going a bit too far. Here we have a local government that (a) doesn't know what is in its current boundaries or (b) is jumping the gun about what the LGAB has recommended, what the Minister will do with the recommendations and the outcome of the current legal action.

Even if the LGAB recommendation is for the Bayswater proposal and is endorsed by the Minister and the legal action fails, the City of Bayswater really should know that it would not have all of Mt Lawley. Indeed, transfer of the Mt Lawley part of the City of Vincent to Bayswater has not once even been mooted during the past 18 months - for which I, for one, am truly thankful.