- Local councils should forget global causes, keep to basics
- By Tom Elliott
- 07/02/2016 Make a Comment
- Contributed by: Linda ( 1 article in 2016 )
No local money should be spent on lobbying or public art
TOO many local councils in Victoria are greedy. They want an ever greater chunk of ratepayers’ scarce cash to pursue trendy global agendas like global warming and same-sex marriage.
Councils should concentrate on providing basic services like roads, rubbish collection, graffiti removal and childcare for a reasonable price.
Last year the State Government imposed an annual cap on rate rises. From 2016, councils cannot increase property rates by more than the rate of inflation (currently about 2.5 per cent per annum).
This cap was an attempt by Local Government Minister Natalie Hutchins to rein the grandiose spending plans too many councils develop.
Unfortunately the rate cap contains an out clause. If a council can convince the Essential Services Commission as to why its rates should exceed inflation, then ratepayers may suffer.
Perhaps predictably, 21 out of Victoria’s 79 municipal councils have decided they need special treatment.
Should the ESC agree, then ratepayers in places like Darebin, the City of Melbourne, Glen Eira, Latrobe, Maribyrnong and Yarra — to name a few — will soon be paying too much. This has to stop.
Many councils seem oblivious to the tough state of the real economy. Take average wage earners, for example. Hardly anyone I know is receiving a pay rise this year, let alone one that consistently matches inflation.
This means that if your rate bill rises, some other part of the household budget — food, clothing, school fees or the occasional meal out — must suffer.
Small businesses are also feeling the pinch. Thanks to both intense competition, and the parsimonious tastes of consumers (due perhaps to their rate bills), profits of any kind are hard to come by right now. Yet it is wage earners and small business owners who councils expect to fund their spending plans.
And what profligate ideas they have!
For a start, many councillors feel that regular trips overseas form a key part of their duties. They attend summits on climate change in Europe. They visit “living cities” talkfests in South America.
Formal relationships with sister cities that bear absolutely no relationship to Melbourne suburbs are forged around the globe. Various fact-finding trips abound, such as the annual visits to East Timor by councillors from the Mornington Peninsula Shire. These journeys are a drain on council funds.
Another major problem we have is that many of our councils call themselves “cities”. As a result, they regard themselves on a par with genuine metropolises in other countries.
Take the Mornington Peninsula Shire again. Recently it showcased its “decade of action” against climate change at the 21st Conference of Parties in Paris. Apparently this now places the shire in the same league as “Copenhagen, New York, Oslo, San Francisco, Buenos Aires and Cape Town”.
Such comparisons are, of course, nonsense. The Mornington Peninsula has just 144,000 permanent residents.
It’s best known as nice place for family holidays, and a good location for retirement. A rival to Manhattan it is not.
If councillors need to learn stuff from overseas, the internet beckons. It’s comprehensive, open to all and also incredibly cheap. Councils have no need to spend ratepayers’ cash on overseas airfares.
Ever since the “Yellow Peril” local governments have fallen over themselves to decorate public spaces.
Public art is another category of spending that really does my head in. Ever since the “Yellow Peril” (originally named The Vault) was commissioned by the City of Melbourne in 1978, local governments everywhere have fallen over themselves to decorate public spaces.
Recently the City of Port Phillip spent $50,000 on a two-tonne concrete replica of a sea sponge called Tethya. Some St Kilda residents refer to it as “whale poo”.
Now I admire a good painting or sculpture. But one’s taste in art is usually a personal thing. For every individual who liked the Peril, at least five more hated it. Councils should stop spending money imposing their artistic preferences on the rest of us.
The same is true for campaigns in favour of nuclear disarmament, gay marriage or increasing the number of asylum seekers who arrive on our shores.
Ridding the world of atomic weapons has been a goal of the international community pretty much since the first one was dropped on Hiroshima in August 1945.
It’s also a campaign that, despite the best efforts of the United Nations, has conspicuously failed.
Someone needs to remind the Moreland City Council of this. Last year it downed tools to honour Hiroshima Day. Moreland also invited a representative of the anti-nuclear group, Japanese For Peace, to address its councillors.
While I’m sure this played well to the inner north’s Leftie constituents, such campaigns by local government are a complete waste of time and money.
Same-sex marriage is another fashionable issue right now. Yes, many people think it unfair that gay people can’t be institutionally unhappy like their heterosexual counterparts. But altering this law is, quite rightly, a function of the federal Parliament.
And when it comes to asylum seekers, ratepayers should be up in arms at the efforts some inner-city administrations make to influence immigration policy.
The civilised world is struggling to deal with the mess created by the Syrian civil war.
If the efforts of the UN High Commissioner for Refugees combined with the governments of Germany, Italy, France, the UK and the US can’t solve this issue, why should suburban councils in Melbourne give it even a moment’s thought?
In order to keep council hands from reaching too deeply into our pockets, a few things must change.
First, with the exception of Melbourne (and perhaps Geelong) no local government entity should be called a “city”. Collecting rubbish across a few neighbouring suburbs does not a city make. “Shire” or “municipality” is more appropriate.
Second, mayors and councillors should not travel overseas unless on a personally funded holiday.
The foreign affairs minister has the job of representing our interests to other countries. Councils do not need to join in.
Third, unless the roads and rubbish collection in a municipality are in tip-top shape, no local money should be spent on lobbying, public art or the creation of sister cities. In short, get the basics right before wasting much-needed cash.
Finally, two decades ago then premier Jeff Kennett amalgamated local government from 210 councils down to 79. This number is still far too high. Every council has its own offices, bureaucracy, town planning department and paid councillors.
Even the reduced 79 versions of these cost centres are wasteful and inefficient. Local Government Minister Natalie Hutchins should follow Kennett’s lead and amalgamate again.
Surely no more than 10 “super councils” is all our state really needs?
Councils should concentrate on providing basic services like roads, rubbish collection, graffiti removal and childcare for a reasonable price.
Last year the State Government imposed an annual cap on rate rises. From 2016, councils cannot increase property rates by more than the rate of inflation (currently about 2.5 per cent per annum).
This cap was an attempt by Local Government Minister Natalie Hutchins to rein the grandiose spending plans too many councils develop.
Unfortunately the rate cap contains an out clause. If a council can convince the Essential Services Commission as to why its rates should exceed inflation, then ratepayers may suffer.
Perhaps predictably, 21 out of Victoria’s 79 municipal councils have decided they need special treatment.
Should the ESC agree, then ratepayers in places like Darebin, the City of Melbourne, Glen Eira, Latrobe, Maribyrnong and Yarra — to name a few — will soon be paying too much. This has to stop.
Many councils seem oblivious to the tough state of the real economy. Take average wage earners, for example. Hardly anyone I know is receiving a pay rise this year, let alone one that consistently matches inflation.
This means that if your rate bill rises, some other part of the household budget — food, clothing, school fees or the occasional meal out — must suffer.
Small businesses are also feeling the pinch. Thanks to both intense competition, and the parsimonious tastes of consumers (due perhaps to their rate bills), profits of any kind are hard to come by right now. Yet it is wage earners and small business owners who councils expect to fund their spending plans.
And what profligate ideas they have!
For a start, many councillors feel that regular trips overseas form a key part of their duties. They attend summits on climate change in Europe. They visit “living cities” talkfests in South America.
Formal relationships with sister cities that bear absolutely no relationship to Melbourne suburbs are forged around the globe. Various fact-finding trips abound, such as the annual visits to East Timor by councillors from the Mornington Peninsula Shire. These journeys are a drain on council funds.
Another major problem we have is that many of our councils call themselves “cities”. As a result, they regard themselves on a par with genuine metropolises in other countries.
Take the Mornington Peninsula Shire again. Recently it showcased its “decade of action” against climate change at the 21st Conference of Parties in Paris. Apparently this now places the shire in the same league as “Copenhagen, New York, Oslo, San Francisco, Buenos Aires and Cape Town”.
Such comparisons are, of course, nonsense. The Mornington Peninsula has just 144,000 permanent residents.
It’s best known as nice place for family holidays, and a good location for retirement. A rival to Manhattan it is not.
If councillors need to learn stuff from overseas, the internet beckons. It’s comprehensive, open to all and also incredibly cheap. Councils have no need to spend ratepayers’ cash on overseas airfares.
Ever since the “Yellow Peril” local governments have fallen over themselves to decorate public spaces.Public art is another category of spending that really does my head in. Ever since the “Yellow Peril” (originally named The Vault) was commissioned by the City of Melbourne in 1978, local governments everywhere have fallen over themselves to decorate public spaces.
Recently the City of Port Phillip spent $50,000 on a two-tonne concrete replica of a sea sponge called Tethya. Some St Kilda residents refer to it as “whale poo”.
Now I admire a good painting or sculpture. But one’s taste in art is usually a personal thing. For every individual who liked the Peril, at least five more hated it. Councils should stop spending money imposing their artistic preferences on the rest of us.
The same is true for campaigns in favour of nuclear disarmament, gay marriage or increasing the number of asylum seekers who arrive on our shores.
Ridding the world of atomic weapons has been a goal of the international community pretty much since the first one was dropped on Hiroshima in August 1945.
It’s also a campaign that, despite the best efforts of the United Nations, has conspicuously failed.
Someone needs to remind the Moreland City Council of this. Last year it downed tools to honour Hiroshima Day. Moreland also invited a representative of the anti-nuclear group, Japanese For Peace, to address its councillors.
While I’m sure this played well to the inner north’s Leftie constituents, such campaigns by local government are a complete waste of time and money.
Same-sex marriage is another fashionable issue right now. Yes, many people think it unfair that gay people can’t be institutionally unhappy like their heterosexual counterparts. But altering this law is, quite rightly, a function of the federal Parliament.
And when it comes to asylum seekers, ratepayers should be up in arms at the efforts some inner-city administrations make to influence immigration policy.
The civilised world is struggling to deal with the mess created by the Syrian civil war.
If the efforts of the UN High Commissioner for Refugees combined with the governments of Germany, Italy, France, the UK and the US can’t solve this issue, why should suburban councils in Melbourne give it even a moment’s thought?
In order to keep council hands from reaching too deeply into our pockets, a few things must change.
First, with the exception of Melbourne (and perhaps Geelong) no local government entity should be called a “city”. Collecting rubbish across a few neighbouring suburbs does not a city make. “Shire” or “municipality” is more appropriate.
Second, mayors and councillors should not travel overseas unless on a personally funded holiday.
The foreign affairs minister has the job of representing our interests to other countries. Councils do not need to join in.
Third, unless the roads and rubbish collection in a municipality are in tip-top shape, no local money should be spent on lobbying, public art or the creation of sister cities. In short, get the basics right before wasting much-needed cash.
Finally, two decades ago then premier Jeff Kennett amalgamated local government from 210 councils down to 79. This number is still far too high. Every council has its own offices, bureaucracy, town planning department and paid councillors.
Even the reduced 79 versions of these cost centres are wasteful and inefficient. Local Government Minister Natalie Hutchins should follow Kennett’s lead and amalgamate again.
Surely no more than 10 “super councils” is all our state really needs?
Source: https://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/opinion/tom-elliott/local-councils-should-forget-global-causes-keep-to-basics/news-story/2e829456d482b20a06177e6acb7a20b2
1Will not be visible to public.
2Receive notification of other comments posted for this article. To cease notification after having posted click here.
3To make a link clickable in the comments box enclose in link tags - ie.<link>Link</link>.
4To show an image enclose the image URL in tags - ie.. Note: image may be resized if too large
To further have your say, head to our forum Click Here
To contribute a news article Click Here
To view or contribute a Quote Click Here