In our last editorial we referred to various State and Territory Governments trampling on the rights of Councils and their communities, adding fuel to the argument that Local Government’s place in our system of governance needs to be fully protected via our Constitution.
With the recent Constitutional Convention turning a strong public focus on aspects of our system of government no longer relevant and other anomalies, Councillor Tom Pyne rightly argues (see President’s Comment) that, if the Australian Constitution was written from scratch today, it is impossible to imagine Local Government not being included.
At the same time, instances of State Governments having scant regard for Local Government and the communities they serve continue to mount. An extraordinary situation has recently occurred in the current Tasmanian restructure process. This has seen Councils being forced to pose referenda questions concerning amalgamation to their communities before the final recommendations of the Local Government Board had been released.
Around half of Tasmania’s 29 Councils went to the people to obtain their views about changes to boundaries that, on the Board’s final recommendations, will see the number of Councils reduced to eleven. However, the Government has also made it clear it will not be bound by these results!
Along the lines of the South Australian reform model, the Tasmanian Local Government Board has also recommended the use of Transition Committees to drive the change process. Councils involved will decide the composition of these Committees. It is expected the Government will embrace this recommendation and not pursue the undemocratic path of locking local people and their representatives out of the reform process.
If the Tasmanian Government has any reservations about this, it need only look across Bass Strait to see the fallout being experienced in some Councils resulting from the usurping of local democracy while State appointed Commissioners ran Local Government in Victoria.
With Elected Representatives finally returned to all but one Victorian Council in March last year, a number of Councils are now sorting out the financial and policy repercussions from decisions made by unelected Commissioners.
Some Councils have reported a flurry of decision making, particularly the locking in of contracts, in the last month or two before the elections. Not only have Councillors found there is often little left to do, but on the pretext of commercial confidentiality, the Council cannot be privy to certain aspects of these contracts.
Situations have arisen where a Council, as duly elected representatives of the local community, and responsible party to the contract, is denied access to aspects of contacts, involving both external suppliers and internal staff appointments.
Described as ‘Commissioners ruling from the grave’, some Councils have found many powers have been delegated to their Chief Executive Officer by Commissioners. Moreover, much of this is confidential, again by the decree of these State appointees.
Residents have elected Councils to make policy decisions and resolve contentious issues, but some Councils are being frustrated because matters, particularly in the planning area, may have been delegated to their CEO. So much for open and accountable government in Victoria.
Although restructure in Western Australia is moving slowly, the use of Commissioners raises concerns. Where Commissioners are appointed, they should only take on a caretaker role in the lead up to the election of the new Council, to be conducted as early as possible.
