Local Government – Why not have an open inquiry?

CLICK HERE TO GO TO SOURCE

Surely there is a better way than this dragged out, nock'em down (maybe?), costly word fight with the Minister, councils and aldermen etc. etc. 

Indeed, what is the Liberal government's agenda in regard to the interference in local councils? Is it as simple political distrust of council decision making or is there more to it? 

The Mercury tells us that Glenorchy's aldermen are "expected to receive a draft board of inquiry report by next month, more than a year after the process began. ... Local Government Minister Peter Gutwein announced the board of inquiry a year ago last week, because of what he described as divisions in the council affecting governance [not to mention ratepayers] ... Mr Gutwein said the draft report would be provided to involved parties by the end of November."

The Mercury reports that "Mr Gutwein said, after receiving the draft report, he would follow the “appropriate processes” to ensure procedural fairness for all parties.... The board has been made up of former West Tamar mayor Barry Easther and former Flinders Island mayor Lynn Mason. ... CLICK HERE TO GO TO THE MERCURY STORY

By all accounts this board is beavering away but getting nowhere fast on the evidence. Mr Easther says “There’s a lot of work to be done ... [and work has been] ...  "delayed earlier this year after Alderman Jenny Branch-Allen brought a Supreme Court case, claiming the board had treated her unfairly." 

Chief Justice Alan Blow found in favour of some of Ald Branch-Allen’s claims in June and he ordered that Ald Branch-Allen be presented with any findings against her and be given an opportunity to respond. 

Interestingly the board of inquiry’s terms of reference include investigating compliance with the Local Government Act 1993 by Mayor Kristie Johnston, aldermen and general manager Peter Brooks. 

Apparently the board is examining governance structures and processes adopted by council since the October 2014 local government elections – and well might they!

Ratepayers throughout Tasmania will have noted that a board of inquiry report into the Huon Valley Council recommended the dismissal of all nine councillors when it was released in June. 

However, Mr Gutwein let everyone off the hook an gave Huon Valley six months to comply with seven ministerial directions – but in the end he has dismissed the council anyway.

George Burrows, a Glenorchy ratepayer has offered up an "alternative for the government to consider and hopefully act upon Local Council has been inept at the best and possibly corrupt at the worst "

Mr. Burrows says"Create a State Government department, it could be structured like the Health and Education Departments, with managers at various levels and salaries depending on the size of the operation. Thus greater Hobart would have a director, Launceston and maybe some lesser positions for other previous council areas."

  

He goes on to say "this would take one expensive tier of government out of the system and save considerably on salaries and allowances for Mayors and Aldermen as well as the many very expensive city managers"  

Its little wonder that this idea has not and is is unlikely to get too much support from the operational wing of local government. Indeed it's speculated that there is a billion dollars to be save by eliminating most of Tasmania's councils.

Mr. Burrows also says "to make sure good representation for citizens continues the money saved is used to increase the Tasmanian Lower House back to the previous numbers."

He also says this would allow"amalgamation, long over due, cutting out an inefficient and costly tier of government and bringing back to the Lower House more elected members, giving citizens a greater choice of candidates, a greater gene pool for ministerial appointments and enough backbenchers a to work with the the problems of citizens in their respective electorates."

Whatever, it is untenable that the status quo might prevail in any sense. Clearly the Local Govt Act is well past its use-by-date and that too many people have too much to loose if any level of change is initiated. Therefore, it is very clear that there is a need to break the impasse here given all that goes before the point we are at.

What to do?  Hold an open public inquiry – judicial inquiry, citizens assembly/jury, whatever – that is held out in the open, with public submissions, open hearings, witnesses being called etc. Such an inquiry would surely encourage the exploration of ideas that currently being suppressed for whatever reason.