18 August 2011
Mr MORRIS (Mornington) — It is a pleasure to join the debate and follow the member for Richmond in speaking on this bill, which will improve the electoral processes for local government. It will strengthen local democracy and importantly it will allow additional time for new councillors to get their feet under the desk and to become accustomed to their new role prior to the consideration of some very important matters which occur early in the term of any new council.
The Bill amends the City of Melbourne Act 2001 to allow representation reviews and makes some consequential amendments to the Local Government (Brimbank City Council) Act 2009.
As I said, I am pleased to support it, and I am equally pleased to hear that the opposition will not be opposing it. I believe it is a practical initiative. It will improve the operation of councils. It also has the support of the sector. Indeed, having the support of both sides of the house, it is clearly not contentious.
It is intended that the legislation come into operation no later than 1 January 2012. It will probably be earlier, but it will certainly be no later than 1 January 2012. That is important, because it will allow councils, councillors, potential candidates and those charged with the running of the election — the Victorian Electoral Commission — to make the necessary preparations well in advance of the election day.
It is also important that we have the legislation in place so that mayors who will next year be affected by this — those serving as mayors in this 12 months and who have not been elected for two years, and there are not very many of those at all — will be completing their term and those who are elected at the end of the year will be aware that it will be a slightly truncated term.
The changes to the Local Government Act 1989 are contained in part 2 of the bill. Clause 3 moves the election day from the fourth Saturday in November to the fourth Saturday in October.
This will give newer councillors time to familiarise themselves with the operations of the council and with processes so that they are able to contribute to the consideration of two very important matters, which are increasingly important as councils become more policy‑oriented, and they are the council plan and the first budget. It is no good learning the ropes and contributing to those things and then six months later, once you have some experience, realising that you are not happy with the document that went through, because that document sets the strategic direction for the council for the balance of the term.
Clause 3 also provides flexibility that is not explicit in the current arrangements. That flexibility will allow alternative dates to be considered to allow for school holidays and other events such as commonwealth elections, natural disasters and so on. The moving of election day to October makes it more likely that school holidays and other events may at some point interfere with the elections.
It is important to note that the government’s election commitment was originally to move election day to the second Saturday in October. That was agreed following discussions with the Municipal Association of Victoria and councils and councillors across the state.
We have modified that original commitment because it was recognised by both the MAV and others, including ourselves, that that date would conflict with school holidays. Clearly you do not want voters’ postal packs left in letter boxes.
The member for Richmond commented earlier on what happened in the bad old days, and I agree that we all repudiate the sorts of practices that occurred in one or two councils in the state in the bad old days. Those things may have perhaps have been the way of local politics then, but in the 21st century those vote‑rigging, voting early and voting often practices are not acceptable under any circumstances, so it is important that we do not encourage those practices through legislation.
It is also important to note that while the minister has the opportunity to vary the date of elections for councils or groups of councils if necessary, once the election is called and nominations are closed the minister has no further role if disaster should intervene, and clearly that will be in the hands of the returning officer.
There are a number of other amendments. Clause 4 amends the date for the return of campaign donations. It is probably true to say that the shorter time frame may lead to greater compliance than we currently have, because it puts the pressure on rather than allowing people to say, ‘I will do it next week or the week after’ or whatever it is. Clause 5 amends a requirement of CEOs to report to the minister, similarly contracting the time period in which such a report is to be submitted, to avoid a conflict with Christmas.
Clause 6 deals with the election of the mayor. There is again a consequential change so that the mayor will be elected after the last Saturday in October and before 30 November. Clause 7 similarly makes minor changes to the date for the settlement of councillor and mayoral allowances and clarifies that it needs to be either six months after the election date or 30 June in the case of a later election date. Clause 8 deals with the Victorian Electoral Commission (VEC) reviews and allows a one‑off five‑month completion prior to this election, which once again is something we would seek to avoid in future years.
Turning to the amendments to the City of Melbourne Act 2001, clause 9 in part 3 effects an important change. It allows the opportunity for the City of Melbourne to have a representation review, which is denied under the current legislation.
To pick up the point raised by the member for Richmond earlier, I am advised that following a request from the Lord Mayor on behalf of the council the minister agreed to the VEC conducting a review of the City of Melbourne’s electoral structure using a similar framework for electoral representation reviews that applies to all other councils.
The VEC has advised that the review is due for completion in March 2012. Obviously this will leave a relatively short time frame for consideration and the enactment of any changes to the council’s electoral structure, because the requirement remains for that to be done by amendment to the act rather than by order in council.
However, in the event that a change is warranted following the review in that regard, the minister is currently considering possible mechanisms to address potential legislative change to be put in place in advance of the next elections, if appropriate.
The council also requested that other aspects of its electoral arrangements be reviewed, such as the automatic voting entitlement for corporation representatives - the ‘deeming’ provisions. Those matters are outside the scope of the VEC’s current review but will be considered in due course.
Clause 11 deals with the election day for Brimbank in a manner consistent with other councils. In response to the question from the member for Richmond regarding the Brimbank situation, the date for Brimbank City Council’s next election was separately specified, as he would know, in the Local Government (Brimbank City Council) Act 2009 following the appointment of the administrators.
The new provision will ensure that Brimbank is brought into alignment with the other councils with the new general election date as proposed by the bill. The provision is consequential only on the proposed change in election day for all other councils, and nothing more than that should be read into it. Clause 12 is a standard repeal clause.
I believe that the amendments proposed are sensible and practical. They will improve the operation of local democracy. They have the support of the sector, and it appears that they will have the support of the house.
The bill will give new councillors the opportunity to properly consider the two major matters they need to confront early in their terms. I believe it is good legislation, and I commend the bill to the house.
Legislative Assembly 18 August 2011
Printer Friendly Version...