LGAT AND ACCOUNTABILITY

Calls for Equal Opportunity Tasmania to investigate workplace health and safety for female councillors
Matt Maloney 

Equal Opportunity Tasmania may be asked to do a workplace review of councils following several resignations by female elected members in recent years. The matter will be discussed at the Local Government Association of Tasmania's annual conference in August. ......................... The general meeting agenda, released this week, includes a motion from the City of Hobart which calls on LGAT to commission Equal Opportunity Tasmania for the review. ......................... The motion stated several female councillors had resigned from their positions in 2019 due to online bullying and harassment. ......................... It pointed to a LGAT survey of elected members that showed of the respondents, 60 per cent said they had experienced bullying and harassment and were not clear on legal protections in terms of workplace safety. ......................... More than 40 local government representatives from 16 councils this year signed a joint statement that expressed concern about workplace culture, particularly for women. ......................... The state government in response to the motion said it considered the review would be most appropriately led by the sector. ......................... "This could include a review into the practice and procedure of councils, including the chamber workplace, existing complaints mechanisms, frameworks and any cultural and structural barriers to reporting alleged discrimination or harassment," it said in its response. ......................... The Burnie City Council has submitted a motion for LGAT to investigate the introduction of propositions or referendums for local government and state elections. ......................... It said the Local Government Act at present provided for elector polls, however, these were non-binding. ......................... "It is of course possible, via legislative amendment, to make the outcome of elector polls mandatory, but this would represent a significant change in current legal arrangements," the motion reads. ......................... "At the state level, there is no standing legal mechanism for conducting referenda. ......................... Those conducted in the past have been done through specific legislation." ......................... The state government said it was unclear what this motion sought to implement and why. ......................... "It would be a significant departure from any established Australian legal or democratic framework for issues-based referenda or other forms of public polling to be binding on councils or the Parliament of Tasmania," it said.The Circular Head Council had proposed a motion that calls for stronger penalties for malicious damage and vandalism to public facilities and infrastructure which has not been supported by the government

COMMENT ... It goes almost without saying that questioning the relevance of Tasmania's Local Govt. Association (LGAT) is the equivalent to flatulence at a dinner party. However, it does need to be said that the organisation is all about self preservation. It does not exist to look after the interests and concerns of ratepayers. It does not exist to facilitate fewer local councils. It does not exist to either advocate for or to ensure that councils – plus alderpeople and councillors – are held more accountable.

Let there be no mistake LGAT is the councillors' peak body and in effect it is there for the benefit of councillors not their constituents – their preservation.

Therefore, the news that the agenda for the LGAT AGM is as it is proof positive that ratepayers interests are not on the agenda. That said, there needs to be mechanisms in place whereby councillors are held to account more effectively.

At the extreme end, councils' constituents need to be able express their lack of confidence in their representatives. If that is by referenda so be it.

Ratepayer need to have the ways and means to effectively, and expediently, hold their representatives to account. If COVID-19 has taught us anything, it is that allowing a circumstance to develop and then act is sheer folly. Going hard, as fast as possible and in the most practical ways possible is what is required.

Tasmania needs fewer councils in order to get better value for their investment in local government. Expecting LGAT to facilitate that objective and realistically is the equivalent to using a faulty handbrake as you career downhill towards a cliff. We need brakes all round and always in good repair.

The bogus equivalences put up by the self interested start by pretending loftily to find no difference between aggressor and victim. Nonetheless, in the end they say that it is the victim of the violence and oppression who is really inciting it and that resolution is beyond control.

If COVID-19 has alerted us to anything it is that the status quo in any guise is not the way forward. Change is no longer optional.

Tandra Vale

FLAG HUMBUG AT THE COUNCIL

The Aboriginal flag will not fly above Launceston town hall or Albert Hall this NAIDOC Week, but the council will vote on a flags policy at next week's council meeting that would allow its addition in the future.

 

The City of Launceston intended to vote on the policy at the July 1 council meeting, but this was delayed due to there being "additional information to clarify with councillors", according to an email from a council officer. ........................ A council spokesperson claimed this vote was not originally intended to align with NAIDOC Week however, which runs from July 4 to 11. ........................ Instead, the policy will be voted on at the July 15 meeting. ........................ The lack of an Aboriginal flag on town hall was again brought to the council's attention via a public question without notice in November, and a commitment was made to develop a flags policy. ........................ Rocelyn Ives, of the Amnesty International Launceston action group, said it was "disappointing" that the issue had not been resolved for eight months. ........................ "It's essential. It's more than just words, it's an action," she said. ........................ "The voice of council is the civic voice for all of Launceston's people. ........................ "And if we're an inclusive community, it's essential we recognise the past history by having the flag there, alongside the national flag." ........................ At the moment, only the national Australian flag and the flag of Launceston flies above town hall. ........................ The flag of Launceston is based on the city's Coat of Arms of 1957, depicting the North and South Esk rivers, kanamaluka/Tamar, tin ingots and Waratah flowers. Picture: Adam Holmes ........................ The council has been carrying out engagement with Heritage Tasmania and the Tasmanian Aboriginal Centre, with heritage approval required for additional flag poles to be placed on town hall and Albert Hall. ........................ Mayor Albert van Zetten said once the flags policy was approved, there would then be a council planning process to go through. ........................ "As the project needs to progress through both a public planning and engineering process after approval by the council, it would not have been possible for it to coincide with NAIDOC week," he said. ........................ "The Aboriginal flag continues to fly at the city's premier cultural institution, the Queen Victoria Museum and Art Gallery, as well as at Home Point on the banks of the kanamaluka/Tamar estuary. The Torres Strait Islander flag is also flown during NAIDOC Week." ........................ In recent years, Break O'Day and Northern Midlands councils have approved the permanent flying of the Aboriginal flag at their offices, while George Town Council has been lobbying nearby councils to place a sculpture and plaque at Batman Bridge commemorating the region's Aboriginal people.

IF there was ever such a blatant case of administrative humbug at the council this is a classic. If this were not serious it would be extraordinarily funny if we think about how big this stuff up is. Excuses, excuses, excuses, anyone would think that the dog has eaten someones homework.

Well here we have a Mayor, Deputy Mayor and a General Manager masquerading as a Chief Executive Officer caught out and sort of claiming that this is trivial in NADOC WEEK.

The apologies on the part of this council needs to be LOUD AND CLEAR and SHE/HE WHO DROPED THE BALL needs to be called out. This has happened before!

Tandra Vale  

Big changes ahead for Tasmanian councils

Graphics by GRAFfix

The government is due to soon release substantially altered laws around the local government sector after a review of the governing act began in 2018. ..................... The review of the Local Government Act produced about 50 proposed changes to laws in 2019. ..................... Voluntary council amalgamations requested by two or more councils will no longer need to be reviewed and approved by the Local Government Board under one proposed change. ..................... The directions paper for the review raised the subject of alternative voting methods and suggested electronic voting should be explored. ..................... The review did not consider council amalgamations or changes to municipal boundaries, or the much maligned code of conduct framework. ..................... The review also did not consider council planning arrangements. ..................... The directions paper suggested scrapping a popular vote for the mayor and deputy mayor positions and having those decisions made around the table by elected representatives of a council. ..................... This was abandoned due to strong opposition to the idea. ..................... The introduction of a candidate nomination fee for local government elections was also abandoned as was a proposal to establish regional councils. ..................... An option to have the candidate elected first in a popularly elected ballot automatically elected as mayor is among the approved proposals. ..................... The review has proposed only Australian citizens should be allowed to vote in council elections and that a person can only vote once in an election. ..................... At the moment, a person that owns both a business and property in a particular municipal area can vote twice. ..................... A draft bill is expected to soon be released for consultation after some months of delay due to COVID-19. 

THE BIG ISSUES DO NOT SEEM TO HAVE BEEN ADDRESSED .... OR should/could that be YET?.... Tandra

\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

How many businesses have chosen to bypass Launceston? Letters to the editor Local News . ANTISOCIAL BEHAVIOUR WHILE there would have been many who felt comments from Alastair Blount highlighting the general state of Launceston's CBD, hoons and graffiti (The Examiner, June 24) to be overly critical, I would argue rightly or wrongly, his comments are correct on every point. ..................... Having lived in Launceston for over 30 years and it is my view various areas of the CBD and surrounding areas are starting to look tired, dirty, and lacking any vibrancy. ..................... It is incredibly disappointing that there seems to be a minority of individuals that have nothing better to do than vandalise or deface the property of others. ..................... In an economical climate that has business margins on a knife's edge, I cannot help but wonder how many prospective business owners bypass Launceston's CBD due to potential antisocial behaviour? \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ ..................... .................... Anthony Camino, Youngtown.