Stands for WALGA that continues to provide its own form of interventionist garbology
training to Rural, Regional and Remote Local Government communities- often to
their detriment.
This organization should, and most likely will, come under close scrutiny during the deliberations regarding changes to the Local Government Act 1995 where it will be proved, beyond reasonable doubt, that a 20th Century Act, still based on a 19th Century local government autocratic, undemocratic, Colonial/ Imperial philosophy has failed to meet the fundamental requirements and the fiscal realities of the 21st Century.
WALGA is well known to be adept at managing and manipulating the current status-quo, a practice that is no longer acceptable and which could lead to the collapse of, or the amalgamation of numerous Local Government Areas much sooner than later.
Its interpretation of the current Act is ‘one size fits all’ to suit its own internal management structures, its manipulative industry expansion ethic and its incompetent skills training programs.
It suffers from a massive Conflict-of-Interest as it directly or indirectly represents everyone within the industry. It also has a tendency to engage in recycling Senior Local Government Employees who have a proven track record of maladministration.
Everything is now in the hands of the Minister for Local Government, David Templeman who appears to be assuring those who have provided in-depth submissions to the review that their advice and recommendations will be heeded.
He already has advice provided to a predecessor in April 2006, twelve long years ago, that the overseeing of Local Government Councils’ in the areas of financial-risk management, administrative responsibilities and governance compliance was next door to non-existent.
Local government industry observers suggest that Mr. Templeman is aware of the alleged power of WALGA, the Local Government Professionals WA and even more importantly the Australian Services Union that has 24,000 members working in the local government sector and
140,000 members overall.
All three, banded together, are an extremely powerful lobby group, far more influential than any ratepayer association.
To save Rural, Regional and Remote Local Government Areas in particular from a slow and painful demise, the Minister must provide a, Local Government Act 2018, which removes the obvious inadequacies of the past by ensuring potent administrative and financial governance reforms despite any political pressure from the big three.
One of the most important of which is there must be a strict separation of both power and influence in all facets of local government including between Local Government officers who spend ratepayers money, those who approve its expenditure and those who must review this expenditure under all financial risk management parameters to ensure it has been correctly spent.
If it has not, then the penalty should well and truly match the malfeasance, whether through hefty fines or appropriate charges being laid in a court of law.
However of most importance is the removal of the power of AUTONOMY that was never granted through legislation in the first place.
Statistics gathered on the performance of Local Government Councils clearly show that the Act, its interpretation’, inept and out of touch Local Government Area Policy creation and implementation and the individual abilities of Councils and Councillors is a MAJOR IMPEDIMENT TO PROGRESS.
The days of La La Land should be over and, with that, the influence of WALGA.
This is how an already submitted ‘A 2017-2018 REVIEW OF THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT ACT 1995- SUBMISSION’ –could affect the Ratepayers of the SHIRE of YORK regarding potential demands that could be placed on its Councillors and Administration.
The NEW TEN COMMANDMENTS, using York as an example, will be as follows: -
This organization should, and most likely will, come under close scrutiny during the deliberations regarding changes to the Local Government Act 1995 where it will be proved, beyond reasonable doubt, that a 20th Century Act, still based on a 19th Century local government autocratic, undemocratic, Colonial/ Imperial philosophy has failed to meet the fundamental requirements and the fiscal realities of the 21st Century.
WALGA is well known to be adept at managing and manipulating the current status-quo, a practice that is no longer acceptable and which could lead to the collapse of, or the amalgamation of numerous Local Government Areas much sooner than later.
Its interpretation of the current Act is ‘one size fits all’ to suit its own internal management structures, its manipulative industry expansion ethic and its incompetent skills training programs.
It suffers from a massive Conflict-of-Interest as it directly or indirectly represents everyone within the industry. It also has a tendency to engage in recycling Senior Local Government Employees who have a proven track record of maladministration.
Everything is now in the hands of the Minister for Local Government, David Templeman who appears to be assuring those who have provided in-depth submissions to the review that their advice and recommendations will be heeded.
He already has advice provided to a predecessor in April 2006, twelve long years ago, that the overseeing of Local Government Councils’ in the areas of financial-risk management, administrative responsibilities and governance compliance was next door to non-existent.
Local government industry observers suggest that Mr. Templeman is aware of the alleged power of WALGA, the Local Government Professionals WA and even more importantly the Australian Services Union that has 24,000 members working in the local government sector and
140,000 members overall.
All three, banded together, are an extremely powerful lobby group, far more influential than any ratepayer association.
To save Rural, Regional and Remote Local Government Areas in particular from a slow and painful demise, the Minister must provide a, Local Government Act 2018, which removes the obvious inadequacies of the past by ensuring potent administrative and financial governance reforms despite any political pressure from the big three.
One of the most important of which is there must be a strict separation of both power and influence in all facets of local government including between Local Government officers who spend ratepayers money, those who approve its expenditure and those who must review this expenditure under all financial risk management parameters to ensure it has been correctly spent.
If it has not, then the penalty should well and truly match the malfeasance, whether through hefty fines or appropriate charges being laid in a court of law.
However of most importance is the removal of the power of AUTONOMY that was never granted through legislation in the first place.
Statistics gathered on the performance of Local Government Councils clearly show that the Act, its interpretation’, inept and out of touch Local Government Area Policy creation and implementation and the individual abilities of Councils and Councillors is a MAJOR IMPEDIMENT TO PROGRESS.
The days of La La Land should be over and, with that, the influence of WALGA.
This is how an already submitted ‘A 2017-2018 REVIEW OF THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT ACT 1995- SUBMISSION’ –could affect the Ratepayers of the SHIRE of YORK regarding potential demands that could be placed on its Councillors and Administration.
The NEW TEN COMMANDMENTS, using York as an example, will be as follows: -
1. The SHIRE of YORK should expect and will, hopefully, understand that its days of autonomy are over and act accordingly. It will be reviewed as- then recorded as having been unable to provide the degree of staff/employee expertise required to meet all the socio-economic requirements it is mandated to provide at a reasonable cost. The best advice is that it should start re-modelling itself, including its staff deployment and its finances- now.
2. The SHIRE of YORK should be accused of unconscionable delays in allowing for local business development hindered by the enforcement of its own, often irrational and inconsistent Local Government Area Policies, and their implementation, that could be deemed to be a deliberate impediment to progress. In these situations, legal action, supported by negative State Government reviews and demand for change to these policies may well become a viable option for all those adversely affected by these arguably preposterous, inexcusable, unprofessional decisions.
3. The SHIRE of YORK Councillors should realize that their method of election as Members of Council is now suggested as being undemocratic and that compulsory, universal franchise is being mooted to increase voter participation and hopefully improve the standard of candidature. This could occur as soon as 2020.
4. The SHIRE of YORK should make itself abundantly aware of the importance of all the services it provides to its community. Its response to this will now be monitored externally and assessed according to the quality, quantity, reliability, necessity and affordability of all these services.
5. The SHIRE of YORK should realize that stringent official demands will be made of it regarding overall operational responsivity and required flexibility to meet all challenges and changes needed with the absolute minimum of delay. This is totally at odds with the Shire of York’s current multi-year decision making practices.
6. The SHIRE of YORK must ensure that all of its Administrative Responsibilities are clearly defined and delegated correctly, according to all standards and each and all associated regulations, and to those employees with demonstrated, professional, qualified ability in that capacity .
7. The SHIRE of YORK must guarantee to improve its efficiency and effectiveness in all its operations.
8. The SHIRE of YORK will be held accountable for ensuring that all its resources are deployed in the most efficient and cost-effective manner. It must prioritize all functional responsibilities to improve performance standards without increasing its rates and charges.
9. The SHIRE of YORK must ensure that proper standards of Financial Management and Accountability are to be maintained and are to be monitored at all times as required by the Department of the Auditor General. Shire Finance Officers can expect regular, unannounced surveillance audits and forensic audits if deemed necessary and be forced to abide by the financial regulatory principles of Australian Corporations Law.
10. The SHIRE of YORK must provide a safe, fire proof and secure data storage system/ archival retention and retrieval service to be maintained for the creation, management, maintenance and retention of all Shire of York records.
This should be all correspondence in any written format including, all e-mails, memoranda and letters, Agendas and Minutes of meetings- being any and all exchanges of information regarding any facet of the Shire of York’s local government activities, between any third party- at all times.
The SHIRE of YORK should realize that its ‘DISCLAIMER ‘ published within Shire Council Agenda and Meetings documents can be construed as uncertainty of its Councillors, Senior Administrators and employees capacity to provide clear, concise, reliable and appropriate verbal responses to any questions raised by its community relating to any and all of its mandated functions.
This is despite the fact that these questions have been submitted in writing prior to a response being required.
It is a universal problem, not restricted to the Shire of York that is now claimed to be creating uncertainty in the minds of ratepayers and local communities regarding the overall quality and reliability of any advice they receive from the Shire Council they fund to provide adequate direction.
Such disclaimers may no longer protect the governing organization, the Shire Council, from being held accountable for the responses that could be established as being the dissemination of unprofessional, incompetent, ill-advised and possible false and misleading information.
The Minister for Local Government, David Templeman’s stated intention is for the Third Tier of Government being Agile, Smart and Inclusive.
It would be drawing a long bow to suggest that the Shire of York is currently any of these.
Then there is the other major problem.
It is the Really Disastrous Con-job
This stands for the Regional Development Commission created by the Regional Development Commissions Act 1993 and the RDC Regulations 1994.
This is another Act, which is a quarter of a century old that can have serious impacts on the progressive future of Rural, Regional and Remote WA. (Twenty five years is more than most get for murder.)
Everyone knows what ‘Regional’ means and the usual interpretation of ‘Development’ is the creation of growth, expansion, progress and success. A ‘Commission’ means an advisory board and/or a directorate that should directly assist in ‘Development’.
Based on this, in 2006, it was suggested that when a fair and equitable distribution of state wealth was finally provided to the Regions, the original Royalties for Regions proposal which had nothing to do with Brendon Grylls, that part of the advisory and administration system could be the Regional Development Commissions.
This was on the understanding that these commissions mandate was to:-
1. Maximise job creation and improve career opportunities in their region
2. Develop and broaden the economic base in their region
3. Identify infrastructure services needed to promote socio-economic growth in their region
4. Provide information and advice to promote business development in their region
5. Seek to ensure the general standards of government services and access to these services in their region is comparable to that which applies in the metropolitan area
6. Generally take steps to encourage, promote, facilitate and monitor the economic development of their region.
There would be some difficulty in suggesting, beyond reasonable doubt that the ‘Wheatbelt Development Commission’ has met any of the criteria.
This Commission comprises of 3 members representing the Minister for Regional Development, Alannah, MacTeirnan, 2 representing the local community, 2 representing local government and a Chairman.
The usual suspects include a former politician, a Real Estate Agent, a farmer, a Shire President and a professional board sitter.
Their general qualifications could be considered questionable given the broad mandate and what should be the actual, professional level of certified expertise required to meet all of these obligations.
It is especially concerning when equated to the fact that all the Rural, Regional and Remote areas, covered by the 9 Regional Development Commissions, have recently
suffered a less than 1.5 % increase in population- according to government statistics.
At least 95% of these areas have a serious decline in population that could bring their overall, continued sustainability as Local Government and/or Regional Areas into question.
It is actually so bad that recent population growth figures show a 12 month population increase of just 309 across the board.
Without population growth, realistically there can be no other growth.
This should require that the current performance of Regional Development Councils be placed under close scrutiny and face a demand for an immediate performance review.
The Minister for Local Government will be receiving a copy of this and so will the Minister for Regional Development.
David Taylor.
It is the Really Disastrous Con-job
This stands for the Regional Development Commission created by the Regional Development Commissions Act 1993 and the RDC Regulations 1994.
This is another Act, which is a quarter of a century old that can have serious impacts on the progressive future of Rural, Regional and Remote WA. (Twenty five years is more than most get for murder.)
Everyone knows what ‘Regional’ means and the usual interpretation of ‘Development’ is the creation of growth, expansion, progress and success. A ‘Commission’ means an advisory board and/or a directorate that should directly assist in ‘Development’.
Based on this, in 2006, it was suggested that when a fair and equitable distribution of state wealth was finally provided to the Regions, the original Royalties for Regions proposal which had nothing to do with Brendon Grylls, that part of the advisory and administration system could be the Regional Development Commissions.
This was on the understanding that these commissions mandate was to:-
1. Maximise job creation and improve career opportunities in their region
2. Develop and broaden the economic base in their region
3. Identify infrastructure services needed to promote socio-economic growth in their region
4. Provide information and advice to promote business development in their region
5. Seek to ensure the general standards of government services and access to these services in their region is comparable to that which applies in the metropolitan area
6. Generally take steps to encourage, promote, facilitate and monitor the economic development of their region.
There would be some difficulty in suggesting, beyond reasonable doubt that the ‘Wheatbelt Development Commission’ has met any of the criteria.
This Commission comprises of 3 members representing the Minister for Regional Development, Alannah, MacTeirnan, 2 representing the local community, 2 representing local government and a Chairman.
The usual suspects include a former politician, a Real Estate Agent, a farmer, a Shire President and a professional board sitter.
Their general qualifications could be considered questionable given the broad mandate and what should be the actual, professional level of certified expertise required to meet all of these obligations.
It is especially concerning when equated to the fact that all the Rural, Regional and Remote areas, covered by the 9 Regional Development Commissions, have recently
suffered a less than 1.5 % increase in population- according to government statistics.
At least 95% of these areas have a serious decline in population that could bring their overall, continued sustainability as Local Government and/or Regional Areas into question.
It is actually so bad that recent population growth figures show a 12 month population increase of just 309 across the board.
Without population growth, realistically there can be no other growth.
This should require that the current performance of Regional Development Councils be placed under close scrutiny and face a demand for an immediate performance review.
The Minister for Local Government will be receiving a copy of this and so will the Minister for Regional Development.
David Taylor.
No comments:
Post a Comment