Just what do the people want and who is asking?

Madeleine Ogilvie MP* Pic* 29.01.17 10:34 am on Tasmania Times writes:... "It is the best of times and the worst of times for Local Government - to borrow a phrase. As we have seen disruption across a number of local industries, so too we are seeing it in the very structures of our local democracy. ........................ It will come as no surprise to anyone that there are challenges in our local government structures - one council in administration, another on notice. It is no small thing to remove democratically elected representatives. ........................ Everyone is quite rightly deeply concerned. ........................ In addition, the Liberal government is reviewing the Local Government Act and has already launched sweeping changes to planning and building laws. Yet there are gaps in the thinking and approach - with lack of consultation being a running theme. ........................ I have also reviewed the Act in light of recent events. ........................ Little consideration appears to have been given to the critical question - ‘what do people want’ and how best to deliver it. Unless we are asking that question, and engaging Tasmanians in developing solutions, as policy makers we risk missing the mark. I have listened to the discussion on the merit of ‘citizen juries’, particularly in these pages, which pick up on these themes. ........................ The retention of local councils, with their local offices, local representation and local jobs, seems to me to be an important part of not only our democracy, but the functioning of our diverse towns and cities. ........................ Forced amalgamations are not the way to go (in my view). Despite what the Minister would have us believe, the mere step of amalgamation does not deliver improved performance, reduce cost or improve democractic representation. Proper thought has to be given to the scope of services, the rates charged, other sources of income, the jobs that would inevitably be shed and whether this is what the people of Tasmania want. ........................ Do people even want amalgamations - I’d say the jury is out on that. ........................ The thorny old organisational structural issue of “centralise v de-centralise” is no different in this context. Of course everything could be amalgamated in Hobart - but would that of itself deliver better outcomes? ........................ How does one even quantify reduced democratic representation in this scenario? ........................ If we reflect on what Labor has done well before (the Tasmania Together process was a good example), we do best when we consult. ........................ I’ve been contemplating whether we can re-boot such a process for our contemporary political landscape (I’m not wedded to the name - suggestions welcome!). A process for continuous consultation that engages the people of Tasmania in a meaningful and genuine way, and which delivers outcomes, could be a game changer for our Island."- See more at: http://tasmaniantimes.com/index.php?/weblog/article/what-do-people-want-/#sthash.fBnFIofm.dpuf

EDITOR'S NOTE: It is indeed encouraging to see that the "Shadow Minister" has come out of her liar to preside over the evolving discourse the Minister is precipitating – or is it stumbling into, that's not entirely clear. This issue has been brewing for quite a while and the silences have been thunderous. 

The Minister for whatever reason has largely been working to maintain the status quo in that he enters a fracas rather gingerly and is then inclined to withdraw just when his proaction might be productive. In its own way that is instructive. 

Nonetheless, Madeleine Ogilvie seems to have opened her door to a dialogue of some sort even if it seems that her mind might still be ajar. Politically all this is tricky territory and there are incomes at stake – councillors and aldermanic allowances is one area of sensitivity you would have to suspect. 

We’ve arrive at an interesting place in ‘these difficult times’ in regard to all this as a lot of these ‘allowances’ have the hallmark of sinecure stamped upon them – some are even rolled gold dependable incomes. And then there is the question of the ‘surplus to requirements’ managerial posts. 

Anyway let’s see where this goes and who is up for what going forward.

Tandra Vale