Subiaco Councillor | Certified Financial Planner | DAP Expert
On 13 March 2015, the long awaited Orders revoked notice from the Governor were published, completing a win for local communities in the Perth Metropolitan area. This means local governments will not be abolished without a vote, and boundary adjustments which made some 3000 residents homeless would not go ahead as promised by Premier Barnett and Minister Simpson.
25 November 2014: Legal challenge by Ian Ker, Subiaco, South Perth, Serpentine Jarrahdale and Peppermint Grove. Chief Justice Martin dismissed all 5 claims. The Transcripts can be seen here: http://www.supremecourt.wa.gov.au/T/transcripts.aspx
Judgement can be read here: http://www.supremecourt.wa.gov.au/_files/CIV1923_2014_CIV2527_2014_Draft_Judgment.pdf
All councils are invited to lodge proposal with the Local Government Advisory Board between 26 August and 4 October 2013: http://metroreform.dlg.wa.gov.au/
Timeline announced here: http://metroreform.dlg.wa.gov.au/Page.aspx?PID=ImplementationTimeline
The City of Subiaco is affected by the preferred amalgamation of the Premier. That consists of Subiaco, Nedlands, Cambridge, Claremont, Cottesloe, Mosman Park and Peppermint Grove: http://metroreform.dlg.wa.gov.au/Content/Maps/Map2_Amalgamated_NedsSubiCambClareCottMosPkPepGr(July2013).pdf
Background information that was used to support the proposed amalgamations is located here: http://metroreview.dlg.wa.gov.au/Page.aspx?PID=BackgroundInformation
Subiaco’s report on community satisfaction 2013: http://www.subiaco.wa.gov.au/fileuploads/Community%20perceptions%20survey%20report%20-%20residents%20-%202013.pdf
The City of Subiaco have a further link showing the timeline todate and what we have done as at 13 March 2013 here: http://subiaco.wa.gov.au/Your-council/About-your-council/Local-government-reform
My own personal view follows:
The Minister for Local Government has put in 12 proposals to amalgamate 30 Perth metropolitan local governments into 15 large councils.
The problem I have with the Minister’s proposals is that each proposal is written on two bits of paper with an attached picture of a map.
The Ministers 12 two-page proposals should be rejected by the Local Government Advisory Board. Why?
Because the public can not scrutinise these proposals. They simply do not have enough detail to warrant a submission of any consequence.
In my view, the Minister’s proposals do not meet with the INTENT of Local Govt Act, Schedule 2.1 Clause 2 (2)(a):
set out clearly the nature of the proposal, the reasons for making the proposal and the effects of the proposal on local governments
Even worse, the Minister has left it up to the LGAB to fill in all the missing detail for the Minister’s Western Suburbs proposal affecting seven local governments. The LGAB will do this by collecting submissions from the seven affected councils and cobble together a recommendation to the Minister. The Minister’s other 11 proposals will get the same treatment.
Unfortunately the missing detail added to the Minister’s proposal cannot be scrutinised by the public prior to going to the Minister because all LGAB recommendations have to be lodged with the Minister by 30 June 2014. There is just not enough time for LGAB to run an open and transparent local government reform process.
Updated: 13 March 2015.