In each edition we feature the views of a Local Government Association President. The following is from Councillor Paul Bell, President of the Local Government Association of Queensland.
Queensland’s 157 local governing bodies are a few weeks away from learning their fate when the Local Government Reform Commission reports on 1 August. While the immediate outcomes are relevant to Queensland only, the ripple affects of this “reform” process will spread out across Australia.
As a quick reminder, FOCUS readers will remember that Queensland Councils started a process of voluntary reforms known as the Size, Shape, and Sustainability (SSS) agenda in February 2006.
In April 2007 the Queensland Government unilaterally repudiated a five year
$25 million agreement with the Local Government Association of Queensland (LGAQ) to support SSS and instead it replaced it with a three month “involuntary reform” process which is overseen by a government appointed Local Government Reform Commission.
The previous requirement to hold local referenda was scrapped and any legal right of appeal or judicial review of the Commission’s decisions was removed.
The Reform Commission’s Terms of Reference (TOR) deal only with amalgamation and exclude the SSS processes broader scope of reforms, such as multi purpose joint Local Governments, shared services and formal regional cooperation arrangements. The TOR has a strong regional planning focus with limited attention to financial sustainability issues – the stated reason for forcible intervention.
While a number of Councils have welcomed the State Government’s processes, the great majority are implacably opposed to the process.
Many of the latter class of Councils are not anti reform, but, like the LGAQ, believe, the process is too narrowly based, far too rushed and undemocratic, in that it specifically excludes the conduct of local referendums on any proposed boundary changes.
The lessons for Local Government around Australia are manyfold.
Firstly, State Government’s appetite for amalgamations have not diminished, economic rationalists still reduce Local Governments to a dollars and cents measure of worth, eschewing local choice and local voice considerations. Moreover, the fact the UK Labor Party has abandoned its centralist and reductionist Local Government agenda, seems to be lost on Queensland’s politicians.
Secondly, policy makers still wrongly believe that they can create economic scale by amalgamating two or three Councils.
Finally, because Councils don’t look, behave like, or smell or taste like State Government then we must be wrong, hence the need for forcible intervention.
Clearly when push comes to shove no amount of previous good will and cooperation with State Government will prevail over a State’s determination to amalgamate Councils – it’s good night nurse!
States historically have seen Councils as part of the problem, not part of the solution. Similarly just as there was a wave of amalgamations in the southern States 15 years ago it’s now the outlying States and Territories that are more the target – there is safety in numbers a cynic might say.
Ultimately, as we all know there are no protections for Councils against unfair or capricious behaviour by State Governments – none. We can never or should never cement in every Council’s existence as circumstances can and will change over the years. However, we must through constitutional means achieve access to fair and just processes for reform.
As the legitimate third sphere of government in the Federation, nothing less than access to the most basic legal rights of natural justice and fair process enshrined in the Australian Constitution will suffice. That is the real task ahead.
