No Taxation Without Representation?

Our letter in today's West Australian sets out a clear case for sacking the City of Perth Council and holding fresh elections for Council and Lord Mayor - along with an interesting 'turn the tables' letter from B Walton of Embleton.

A key issue that has been all but absent from discussion of the City of Perth Act is that the current Subiaco electors who will be forcibly transferred to City of Perth on July 1st will be without representation until October 2017 - and even then will only have the chance to vote for half the council and not for the Lord Mayor, who is not due for re-election until 2019.

No matter that some City of Perth councillors will do their best to engage with the ex-Subiaco community, the fact is that they have not been elected by those people.

At the same time, the City of Perth will expect those people to pay rates and rubbish charges to support a council budget they have had no part in determining.

This smacks of 'taxation without representation' which was one of the major causes of the American Revolution. We could hardly blame those soon-to-be-former Subiaco ratepayers if they were to refuse to pay taxes levied on this undemocratic basis.

Simpson Puts City of Perth Council on Notice

Local Government Minister, Tony Simpson, has put the City of Perth Council on notice, saying he would consider action if "they did not get back on track". He called last night's 'goings on' a "disgrace for the ratepayers of the City of Perth" - I hope he actually meant 'electors', although since the City of Perth is supposedly the Capital City of WA, with claims (under the City of Perth Act) to "to maintain and strengthen the local, national and international reputation of the Perth metropolitan area", we are ALL citizens of the Capital City and affected by the actions of the City of Perth.

The 'goings on' last night were a disgrace for all the citizens of Western Australia.

Asked if he would consider sacking the Council if the bad behaviour continued (as we have been arguing here should happen), Minister Simpson said he would "definitely have a look at it".

https://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/wa/a/31629239/perth-councillors-turn-on-deputy-mayor/

Not All Doom And Gloom at City of Perth

Despite yesterday's shenanigans at City of Perth, it seems it is at last starting to dawn on more than a minority of councillors that greater openness, transparency and accountability are required.

Cr Reece Harley reports that, in the same meeting, the City of Perth Council adopted two resolutions to this effect:

1. "That Council requests the administration of the City of Perth to upload audio recordings of Council Meetings to the City of Perth's website by close of business the following working day."

2. "That Council requests the CEO of the City to carry out a review of the terms of reference and membership structure of the City's Audit & Risk Committee. Council notes that all other Capital Cities of Australia have an externally appointed and suitably qualified member as Chair of their Audit Committee."

https://www.facebook.com/ReeceHarley4Perth/posts/988454307918263

City of Perth Council is Dysfunctional and Should be Sacked

I doubt that anyone in Perth is unaware of the ongoing saga of Perth Lord Mayor, Lisa Scaffidi, and her travel rorts, including damning reports from both the Crime and Corruption Commission and most recently from the Local Government Department (http://www.parliament.wa.gov.au/WebCMS/WebCMS.nsf/resources/file-perth-inquiry-report/$file/Perth%20Inquiry%20Report.pdf) which recommended as follows:

3. Conclusion and recommendation 

37. The findings which relate to possible minor breaches, in relation to accepting prohibited gifts and failing to disclose interests affecting impartiality, occurred in excess of two years prior and therefore, are outside the statute of limitations. Disciplinary action cannot be taken in respect of those matters.

38. In light of the remaining findings, the authorised persons recommend that consideration be given to commencing disciplinary action against Mayor Scaffidi in relation to the allegations contained in this report under the heading “Schedule of Alleged Breaches’. Those allegations mirror the findings of the authorised persons. However, since the State Administrative Tribunal must independently determine whether any serious breaches have occurred, the findings in this report would amount only to allegations in the event disciplinary proceedings were commenced. 

Scaffidi's intransigence in response to these findings prompted Deputy Lord Mayor, James Limnios, to threaten a motion of no-confidence in the Lord Mayor, but he was pre-empted this evening by Cr Janet Davidson successfully moving a motion of no-confidence in the Deputy Lord Mayor himself. According to West Australian reporter Kate Emery on Twitter (https://twitter.com/kirovkate?lang=en) Cr Limnios has apparently declared that he will not step down as Deputy Lord Mayor. According to Kate Emery, Crs Reece Harley, Jemma Green and Lily Chen opposed the no-confidence motion (as did Limnios). The others were in favour.

Any fair-minded observer would have to conclude that the City of Perth Council, far from being the elite capital city council promoted by Barnett and Simpson during the passage of the City of Perth Act, is dysfunctional and should be sacked and new elections should be held as soon as possible, which would give a voice to those electors forcibly transferred against their will from the City of Subiaco.

Are Lord Mayor and CoP Worthy To Be Our Capital City?

In a previous post (http://capitalcitycitizenscommittee.blogspot.com.au/2016/03/post-asks-difficult-questions-no-one.html) we remarked upon the apparent lack of interest by the media in the creation of our Capital City under the Capital City Act.

However, the Lord Mayor's recent behaviour (http://www.watoday.com.au/wa-news/lisa-scaffidi-saga-opposition-wants-investigation-into-perth-lord-mayor-travel-20160316-gnk87w.html) has received attention - and deservedly so.

Lisa Scaffidi just doesn't get it when it comes to openness and accountability.

She admits there are more trips she hasn't declared - which raises the question of why she apparently didn't mention these to the CCC. She attempts to justify some of them by saying that other Lord Mayors went as well - but who else went is not the issue. The issue is that they were paid for by a third party and therefore should be declared lest they be seen to potentially have influenced the Lord Mayor in the performance of her duties.

Shadow Local Government Minister, David Templeman is quite right in saying that the Barnett Government is taking too long to release the inquiry report, that the standing of the Lord Mayor was being sullied by speculation and that it "erodes the status and puts a dark cloud over the City of Perth in total".

What a pity, then, that Mr Templeman and the ALP didn't delay the passage of the City of Perth Bill through the Parliament so that these matters could be resolved and we could be sure the City of Perth was worthy of its new exalted status before the Bill became law.

The ALP voted against referring the City of Perth Bill to a committee of the Legislative Council, where such matters could have been investigated.

And if such a move had failed (as would have been likely, given that the Nationals also opposed it), the ALP should have had the courage to remove its Lower House support for the Bill and vote against it - which, given that the Nationals, the Greens and Rick Mazza voted against would have defeated the Bill.

As it is, we have legislation for the City of Perth to be WA's Capital City precisely at the time that its Lord Mayor and, by implication, the whole Council, is under a very large cloud.

Post Asks The Difficult Questions - No One Else Interested, It Seems

The Subiaco Post has been the only newspaper to give consistent and comprehensive coverage to the City of Perth Bill, now Act.

For all the hype (from Barnett, Simpson and Scaffidi) about the importance of the City of Perth Act (https://www.mediastatements.wa.gov.au/Pages/Barnett/2016/02/Capital-city-Act-passed-by-Parliament.aspx; http://www.perth.wa.gov.au/newsroom/featured-news/city-perth-bill-passes-parliament), I have been unable to find a single word about it in the West Australian since it passed the Parliament.

So much for "a landmark moment for the State" (Colin Barnett) and "the pathway for Perth to become an economic powerhouse" (Scaffidi).

The Post also questions how well ALP Leader, Mark McGowan (and, by implication, his local government spokesman, David Templeman) actually understood key elements of the Bill they were helping pass through Parliament.

Subiaco Post, 5th March 2016. Click to Enlarge

The CCCC believes that McGowan had no good reason for being unaware of the threat to Kings Park, given the amount of correspondence and communication we have had with him, with his Local Government Spokesman, David Templeman, and indeed with all Members of the WA Parliament.

And The Losers Are…

The City of Perth Bill has passed the Parliament thanks to collusion between most Liberals and the ALP.

Remember this when it comes to the 2017 State Election.

Thanks to Hon Simon O'Brien, MLC, for his spirited, eloquent and principled statements, right to the end, and to Hon Robin Chapple, MLC, for tilting at windmills by moving amendments - but we are bemused at the absence of any amendment dealing with the boundary change affecting Subiaco.

Thanks also to the Hon Martin Aldridge and the Hon Rick Mazza, and Rob Johnson in the Legislative Assembly, for speaking against the Bill and asking some awkward questions many of which remain unanswered.

The Upper House voting speaks for itself, with only the Greens, the Nationals, the Hon Simon O'Brien and the Hon Rick Mazza voting against the Bill - and the Hon Nigel Hallet effectively doing so by having a 'pair' with an ALP member.

And now, in the tradition of the Oscars, the LOSERS are:

- The 3000 residents of Subiaco who will be forcibly relocated into the City of Perth without any say in the matter - their local MP (Bill Marmion) was worse than useless.

- The remaining ratepayers and residents of Subiaco, who will be faced with increased costs as a result of losing the Subiaco 3000.

- Nedlands Liberal MLA, Bill Marmion, who abandoned and refused to represent his constituents in Subiaco and should pay the price at the 2017 election.

- The Governance of WA, as a result of the collusion between the two major parties.

- The dignity of the Legislative Council, as a result of its being unwilling to investigate not only the substantial detail of the Bill in committee but also the transitional provisions which give the Executive power to change the legislation without the approval of Parliament.

- The people of WA for all of whom Perth is the capital city and who deserve better than the "draft second-rate press release" (thank you Simon O'Brien) that masquerades as the City of Perth Act.

And the WINNER is ……… no one.

This Act does nothing constructive for anyone. It simply feeds the vanity of the Premier and the Lord Mayor of Perth.

As the Hon Simon O'Brien said in Parliament: [I can't understand] "why all of this is necessary, beyond some vague representation that 'Some other cities have got a capital city legislation, so we should have it, too.' … The community as a whole has not been involved in it, and we cannot identify anything that it will produce. … It is pointless legislation—totally pointless."

Post amended 28th February to correct voting list.

The Ancient Chinese Curse Strikes Again

Well, we certainly hope that Barnett and Co feel they are living in interesting times - but this one is entirely of their own making.

They could have consulted before introducing the City of Perth Bill into the Parliament, which would have reduced the time needed to massage it through the Parliament.

Alternatively, having introduced the Bill (in May 2015), they could have managed Parliamentary business so that its passage (should it be passed) was consistent with the timelines specified in the Bill.

As it is, surely the Legislative Council cannot pass a Bill which cannot be complied with. At the very least, it should amend the offending dates to something that the City of Subiaco can comply with and to ensure an internally consistent timeline for implementation. This would not be an easy task if the Government wants to stick to its 1st July 2016 date for the new boundaries to take effect.

These amended timelines, themselves, would, of course, have to allow for the time required to send the Bill back to the Legislative Assembly for approval and then return to the Legislative Council.

The bottom line is that the City of Subiaco cannot start the review of wards and ward boundaries required by the City of Perth Bill until it has been passed by both houses of the Parliament and has been proclaimed by the Governor.

Click to enlarge

WA Today, 3rd February, 2016

Ironic Recognition

Congratulations to Cecilia Brooke for the award of the Premier's Australia Day Active Citizenship Award for a person over 25 years for the City of South Perth.

There's a lot more to the citation than her tireless work to prevent the forced amalgamation of South Perth and Victoria Park (and now to protect Kings Park and the residents of Subiaco against the City of Perth Bill), but many of us beyond South Perth will be forever thankful to Cecilia for her role in getting Colin Barnett to "fly the white flag" and back down from his forced local government amalgamations.

I wonder if Barnett gets the irony - we hope there's more to come.

Subi Pulls No Punches - But We Should ALL Be Concerned

The City of Subiaco was a key player in keeping the Barnett Government something approaching honest in the initial forced local government amalgamation fiasco. Now it is being given payback in the City of Perth Bill, after Nedlands and Victoria Park objections to the original Bill were accommodated.

There has been no justification presented for forcing the Subiaco 3000 into the City of Perth and, as we have previously noted here (http://capitalcitycitizenscommittee.blogspot.com.au/2016/01/the-forgotten-17000.html), the remaining 17,000 Subiaco residents will be forced to pay a hefty price for the Premier's arrogance and vindictiveness.

Time for all who care about community to stand up and be counted. There is still time to write to your Upper House MPs (list, with email addresses, at http://www.parliament.wa.gov.au/parliament/memblist.nsf/WebCurrMembElectorate?OpenView&Start=1&Count=1000&Expand=1#1) telling them you object to the treatment of Subiaco residents, whether the 3000 being forced into the City of Perth or the 17,000 who will be forced to pay for it.

http://www.watoday.com.au/wa-news/city-of-perth-scandal-subiaco-mayor-takes-swipe-at-controversial-council-20160122-gmbs8z.html

Simple, Really

The Forgotten 17,000

The 3000 residents of Subiaco who would be forcibly transferred to the City of Perth under the City of Perth Bill have received scandalously little attention during the parliamentary debate on the City of Perth Bill. The focus has almost entirely been on the University of Western Australia, the QEII Medical Centre and the Perth Children's Hospital. The Subiaco 3000 are, apparently, simply collateral damage.

To the extent they have been mentioned, it has been on the basis that those residents would have their rates reduced by 30% to the City of Perth residential rate level - which conveniently ignores the fact that the City of Perth currently subsidises residential rates and has expressed its intention to reduce or remove this subsidy.

http://www.perth.wa.gov.au/sites/default/files/documents/City%20of%20Perth%20Annual%20Budget%202014-2015.pdf

The remaining 17,000 residents of Subiaco have not been scandalously ignored - they have been totally ignored by our elected representatives in Parliament.

Now, the City of Subiaco has exposed the effects on these hitherto invisible people. In an item for discussion at the Subiaco Council Meeting on 19th January (http://www.subiaco.wa.gov.au/getattachment/b4fae429-af3e-4f96-920e-259cd9b986a0/OCM-19-January-2016 - see item at foot of this post), the revenue loss and (to be fair and balanced) the corresponding reductions in costs have been identified. The net result is an increase in rates of 7% over and above what would be necessary for other reasons - or a reduction in services.

All this simply for the aggrandisement of the City of Perth and at the sole instigation of the Premier, Colin Barnett - at a time when he is critical of local governments for rate rises and threatening rate capping.

There is a well-known principle in economics (the 'Pareto principle') that something is worth doing if those who benefit can potentially compensate those who lose and still be better off (in sort, that the benefits exceed the costs) - but this is hotly disputed where the gainers do not actually compensate the losers.

In this case, the State Government could include compensation provisions for Subiaco ratepayers and residents in the City of Perth - but I'm not holding my breath for this to happen. Not only is Colin Barnett's track record on equity issues not encouraging, but there has been absolutely no evidence of benefits produced - and it is therefore likely that the gainers could not, even potentially, compensate the losers.

All makes the City of Perth Bill sound like like very bad public policy - but we already knew that.

 

Kings Park - Prime Real Estate?

Alston, cartoonist for the West Australian, is surely a bit over the top (well, we certainly hope so) when he 'predicts' subdivision of Kings Park into 400 square metre residential lots in 2016. Even Barnett and Co surely couldn't see flogging off parts of Kings Park as a partial 'cure' for the economic and financial ills they have created - could they?! On the other hand, it's not a million miles removed from Lord Mayor Lisa Scaffidi's thought bubble about a (publicly-funded) road tunnel under Kings Park and turning Mounts Bay Road, at the foot of Kings Park, into an exclusive (private) residential enclave.

However, we should all be concerned that the City of Perth Bill, currently before the Legislative Council (having passed the Legislative Assembly in November 2015), gives the unelected Executive Director, Public Health, "all the powers of a local government" in respect of "public health". In turn, 'public health' is defined so broadly that it could be construed to include development for health-related purposes, such as hospital expansion, provision of health-related services and even car parking.

The Government, however, claims that the provision in the City of Perth Bill simply clarifies the existing situation and clauses 29 and 30 are simply a restatement of powers already available in the Health Act , which prompts two questions:

a) Why the need to include the provisions in the CoP Bill  at all?

b) Why is the wording different and apparently granting wider powers through the broad definition of public health and granting of “all the powers of a local government”, whereas the Health Act  restricts to powers of local government environmental health officer.

We have previously addressed this important issue on this blog (http://capitalcitycitizenscommittee.blogspot.com.au/2015/08/kings-park-simpson-playing-man-not-ball.html) and nothing since then has made us any less concerned.

If the Government's claim about its intention is correct, all it needs is a simple statement along the following lines:  “The Executive Director Public Health shall have the powers granted him by the Section 12 of the Health Act 1911  in respect of Kings Park”. Having different wording dealing with the same powers in the City of Perth Act and the Health Act would not only be confusing and lead to legal ambiguity that might have to be resolved by the courts, it would also complicate amendment of either Act in the future.

The Weekend West, 16th January 2016