Queenslander!
In 1927, a Royal Commission was initiated by the State Government to investigate "distribution and size" of local governments. One of the concluding recommendations was that the 152 Local Authorities be reduced to 86 (see
page13). The state government did not act on that recommendation.
Fast forward 80 years and it appears we still can't get it right. The issue of council amalgamations was handled atrociously, as
Andew Bartlett has noted previously. It was most certainly an exercise in the abuse of process and a blatant contempt for democracy. A Spin campaign hit the MSM following this and Queenslanders were
far from happy with the decision.
Of course, the
spin machine sent out all the benefits of the decision. In the end it is apparently all about
stronger councils (as highly questionable as that is). However, as our PM says "if there’s any proposal for an amalgamation, that it should be tested by the local people through a referendum."
Far from happy.
Swamp News reports and we learn that
LGAQ executive director Greg Hallam suspects the Beattie government had its own reasons for moving the amalgamation process along quickly.
“The real reason for the undue haste is that there is a direct connection between this process, and the state seat re-distribution later this year,” he said.
“We believe this is a very clever, Machiavellian plot to influence the state re-distribution in October.”
Surely it was never about that.
So, I guess it was also never about pro-developer councils like Cairns City eating up smaller councils like Douglas Shire, virtually opening the gate and letting the developers walk right through to places like the Daintree and more likely some of the other rainforest and coastal areas in the Douglas Shire. That is not in the interests of Queenslanders.
And, even the developers have reported some potential problems with the decision, with the problems of
housing affordability to be potentially exacerbated by the amalgamations.
I know there is a long way to go and time will tell us the outcomes but these reforms are increasingly looking extreme and misguided at best. And any potential benefits seem to be outweighed by some terrible outcomes.
Larvatus Prodeo pointed out (amongst the surrounding intensity of a federal election) the concerns expressed that further services will be lost from the bush similar to what happened in Victoria with the Kennett amalgamations in the 1990s.
Anna must be hoping that Pete's parting gift was not a WorkChoices of a reform.
UPDATE:
The Bligh government decision to remove
“Constitutional Corporation” status is both extraordinary and unprecedented. It also adds to the fears that council amalgamations are an extreme reform that Queenslanders have rejected but the government decided to push through anyway.
The Opposition are scathing and so they should be.
Howard Hobbs, Shadow Minister for Main Roads and Local Government, says "Local Government’s in Australia and throughout the world have been constituted as corporations and empowered as a body corporate with perpetual succession, a common seal, and may sue or be sued in its name. The effect of the State Government Local Government and Industrial Relations Amendment Bill 2008 will take away Local Government’s existence in law as a separate legal entity".
The government claims that
de-corporatisation of Local Government will not affect their existing rights and responsibilities and they will retain existing powers. Not sure how that can be reconciled given the recent developments. As I said, this is unprecedented and has not been tested in law. Thus, Hobbs says "Councillors as individuals who will proceed to constitute the Council may find themselves subject to liability".
It is fast becoming a dog of a policy. If it wasn't already.