Darebin residents will today find out if the Victorian Electoral Commission has recommended multi-councillor wards, or a maintenance of the unrepresentative status quo in the form of continued council domination by the Labor Unity faction of the ALP.
Preliminary submissions to the Commission put a strong case for allowing more diverse representation on council by electing multiple councillors per ward via proportional representation, in which candidates achieving a minimum quota of votes derived by a formula are elected to council.
The adoption of proportional representation would likely mean that Greens, independents and other alternative voices with strong community support would be able to represent, and vote for, widely held community views in the council chamber.
Currently, preferential voting to establish a majority for a single councillor in each ward allows the ALP undue influence on the process via high numbers of candidates with an ALP alignment directing their preferences to the ALP's preferred councillor in any given ward. The number of candidates in a single ward has been as high as 18 in recent Darebin council elections.
The announcement of the VEC's preliminary findings will likely come via the media release page of the VEC website. Following release of the findings, responses must be submitted to the VEC by 24 April.
Watch this site for updates. Please use the comment link to this post (see below) to have your say, or send me an email
Tuesday, April 3, 2007
Wednesday, March 28, 2007
PPP for Northcote?
Today's edition of The Melbourne Times carried my letter calling on Victorian Housing Minister, Richard Wynne, to rule out a public–private partnership on a Northcote public housing site set for redevelopment in 2008. Here it is:
While this development was welcomed by the representative for the Carlton Local Area Network, Steve Dobson, the central criticism of the development remains valid. The public units on the site will be massively outnumbered by private units in the face of long waiting lists for public housing in inner-city areas. And this on public land that should be retained for public benefit. Wynne's announcement, while some relief to residents, is tokenism.
It will be interesting to note developments at Roberts Street, Northcote, on the future fate of which I understand residents are meeting today.
Watch this site for updates. Comments and questions are welcome here, or you can send me an email.
Judging by the community reaction to the panel report on the Carlton public housing redevelopment, current and future public tenants of Northcote's Roberts Street flats have little to hope for.The same issue carried the surprise announcement by Wynne that the numbers to be accommodated on the Carlton site would mark an increase of 250 on the current population, albeit housed in the same number of units as originally planned (246, see 'Surprise rise in resident numbers for Carlton estate', p. 13).
Minister Wynne has been silent on whether the site is destined for a public–private partnership (PPP). If this approach were adopted, it would open the gates to a Carlton-style scenario of inappropriate ratios of private to public housing, albeit on a smaller scale. There is also the question of the impact of the redevelopment on the neighbouring park.
After such a long history of neglect and delay regarding this site, I call on Minister Wynne to come clean on Roberts Street Northcote, to rule out a PPP, and to safeguard the adjacent park from development. The current housing site should be retained for the public benefit, and that means aged housing integrated within the community to help address the heavy public waiting lists for accommodation. We don't need another public gift to private developers.
While this development was welcomed by the representative for the Carlton Local Area Network, Steve Dobson, the central criticism of the development remains valid. The public units on the site will be massively outnumbered by private units in the face of long waiting lists for public housing in inner-city areas. And this on public land that should be retained for public benefit. Wynne's announcement, while some relief to residents, is tokenism.
It will be interesting to note developments at Roberts Street, Northcote, on the future fate of which I understand residents are meeting today.
Watch this site for updates. Comments and questions are welcome here, or you can send me an email.
Sunday, March 25, 2007
Darebin keeps lid on representation review
The City of Darebin has played down the current council representation review in its online and print communications with residents. This despite the fact that the council and the community have a massive stake in the outcome, which will determine the future number of councillors and wards in the municipality.
Late last week, I received the March issue of Darebin News in the mail. Despite a message from the Mayor, councillor Marlene Kairouz, touting the council's efforts to consult with residents, and a 'dates for your diary' page stretching through to October, twenty full-colour A4 pages contained not a single mention of the review.
Surprised by the newsletter, I searched the council's website and found only a single item about the review – a 9 March media release setting out Council's predictable quest to retain nine single-councillor wards occupied by nine ALP Labor Unity faction members. There was no link to the council submission [but it's been published by the VEC], or to the Victorian Electoral Commission's website for the review. Apart from that, there was no coverage of the issue I could find in Darebin's communications, even though the review will determine how residents are represented following the 2008 council elections.
If council can devote substantial resources to communicating with the community – from print newsletters, to the website and even podcasts – then it seems more than appropriate that the representation review, as a vital issue concerning all Darebin residents, should be covered in depth. When that doesn't happen, council is open to the accusation that it is seeking to play down the issue in an effort to protect the vested interests of its councillors, who would be challenged and quite possibly replaced if the review resulted in elections for multi-councillor wards in Darebin.
I can't wait for the April edition of Darebin News, which will no doubt land in my letter-box sometime around 24 April, the deadline for response submissions to the VEC's preliminary findings – judging by the March edition of Darebin's newsletter, it seems doubtful the review will receive much coverage as the last chance for public input quietly slips by.
Readers can keep track of the review at the Victorian Electoral Commission website, where they can also read all the preliminary submissions. The VEC's preliminary findings will be published on 3 April.
Watch this site for updates. Comments and questions are welcome here, or you can send me an email.
Late last week, I received the March issue of Darebin News in the mail. Despite a message from the Mayor, councillor Marlene Kairouz, touting the council's efforts to consult with residents, and a 'dates for your diary' page stretching through to October, twenty full-colour A4 pages contained not a single mention of the review.
Surprised by the newsletter, I searched the council's website and found only a single item about the review – a 9 March media release setting out Council's predictable quest to retain nine single-councillor wards occupied by nine ALP Labor Unity faction members. There was no link to the council submission [but it's been published by the VEC], or to the Victorian Electoral Commission's website for the review. Apart from that, there was no coverage of the issue I could find in Darebin's communications, even though the review will determine how residents are represented following the 2008 council elections.
If council can devote substantial resources to communicating with the community – from print newsletters, to the website and even podcasts – then it seems more than appropriate that the representation review, as a vital issue concerning all Darebin residents, should be covered in depth. When that doesn't happen, council is open to the accusation that it is seeking to play down the issue in an effort to protect the vested interests of its councillors, who would be challenged and quite possibly replaced if the review resulted in elections for multi-councillor wards in Darebin.
I can't wait for the April edition of Darebin News, which will no doubt land in my letter-box sometime around 24 April, the deadline for response submissions to the VEC's preliminary findings – judging by the March edition of Darebin's newsletter, it seems doubtful the review will receive much coverage as the last chance for public input quietly slips by.
Readers can keep track of the review at the Victorian Electoral Commission website, where they can also read all the preliminary submissions. The VEC's preliminary findings will be published on 3 April.
Watch this site for updates. Comments and questions are welcome here, or you can send me an email.
How do you want to be represented on council?
Residents of the City of Darebin and anyone interested in local democracy have been asked to make submissions on the future shape of the Darebin council. A representation review for the municipality is currently being carried out by the Victorian Electoral Commission, which will report on preliminary submissions on 3 April.
It's important to keep track of the review because there will be an opportunity to make further submissions on this report that will potentially shape your local council and influence just how well it represents your interests and those of the broader community.
Currently there are nine single-councillor wards in Darebin, each held by a member of the ALP's Labor Unity faction.
While the City of Darebin has understandably argued to keep this unrepresentative status quo, many of the preliminary submissions have instead argued for multi-councillor wards to more broadly represent the interests of Darebin residents.
If this were achieved, the result would be a council that included a range of views with strong support in the community. A popular suggested model has been to move to three wards each represented by three councillors. Councillors would be elected by proportional representation, which would mean election would come not via a majority, but through substantial support indicated by a minimum quota of votes.
Rucker ward's Councillor Steven Tsitas has voiced his opposition to this proposal, stating that proportional representation allows a role for 'marginal players in democracy'. This neglects the fact that some councillors, himself included, were elected not through an outright majority, but with the support of preferences from minor candidates. This has sometimes meant that candidates with the highest level of support from first-preference votes actually fail to get elected.
An additional problem with the current system is that, all too often, ALP candidates are supported by a string of factionally aligned candidates whose only role is to direct their preferences, not to be elected in their own right. In Darebin, there have been as many as 18 candidates contesting a single ward.
Further updates on the progress of the review will be published here, and I encourage you to participate in shaping local democracy.
Comments and questions are welcome here, or send me an email. If you are interested, you can also read my review submission.
It's important to keep track of the review because there will be an opportunity to make further submissions on this report that will potentially shape your local council and influence just how well it represents your interests and those of the broader community.
Currently there are nine single-councillor wards in Darebin, each held by a member of the ALP's Labor Unity faction.
While the City of Darebin has understandably argued to keep this unrepresentative status quo, many of the preliminary submissions have instead argued for multi-councillor wards to more broadly represent the interests of Darebin residents.
If this were achieved, the result would be a council that included a range of views with strong support in the community. A popular suggested model has been to move to three wards each represented by three councillors. Councillors would be elected by proportional representation, which would mean election would come not via a majority, but through substantial support indicated by a minimum quota of votes.
Rucker ward's Councillor Steven Tsitas has voiced his opposition to this proposal, stating that proportional representation allows a role for 'marginal players in democracy'. This neglects the fact that some councillors, himself included, were elected not through an outright majority, but with the support of preferences from minor candidates. This has sometimes meant that candidates with the highest level of support from first-preference votes actually fail to get elected.
An additional problem with the current system is that, all too often, ALP candidates are supported by a string of factionally aligned candidates whose only role is to direct their preferences, not to be elected in their own right. In Darebin, there have been as many as 18 candidates contesting a single ward.
Further updates on the progress of the review will be published here, and I encourage you to participate in shaping local democracy.
Comments and questions are welcome here, or send me an email. If you are interested, you can also read my review submission.
Saturday, December 9, 2006
Did a misleading campaign change the Northcote result?
On the latest figures from the VEC, the answer is quite possibly 'yes'. With votes comprising some 90.36 per cent of the total enrolment now counted, the number of people who either voted informally or did not vote at all numbered some 5345. If even a portion of that number had combined with people who voted Labor only because of the ALP's misleading campaign, the line between a Greens and an ALP victory might have been very thin indeed.
That conclusion is important, because the Electoral Act 2002 places a requirement on the Court of Disputed Returns to consider whether the result would have been changed in determining petitions challenging election results. Given that the figures suggest that the ALP's misleading campaign might have swung the balance, there appears to be scope for the Greens to challenge the Northcote result in court. Advice from the VEC indicates that this would need to occur within 40 days of the return of the writ, which is anticipated for 16 December.
I should also include here an update on the tally for the seat, as the figures given in my last post were calculated when counting had only been partially completed and things have improved somewhat for the ALP. In 2002, votes comprising 91.37 per cent of the total enrolment were counted, so this suggests that counting for 2006, at 90.36 per cent, must now be down to the very last votes. Given that, how has the ALP fared?
Well, despite an increase of 2.3 per cent in the total enrolment, first-preference votes for the ALP were down from 18,229 for Delahunty in 2002 to 17,470 for Richardson in 2006. The number of informal votes was up 0.5 per cent as a proportion of the total vote (up by 190 to 1624), as were non-voters at 1.0 per cent as a proportion of the total enrolment (about 3721 in 2006, compared to 3257 in 2002).
The upshot is that, despite its misleading campaign, the ALP first preference vote was down by about 2.7 per cent, and engagement in the process also fell away. It could well be that, as well as deceiving voters to vote for them instead of the Greens, the ALP may have turned people away who were uncertain what to believe. If that's a fair and open election, we're setting the bar pretty low.
For those so inclined, the 2002 results can be compared with the 2006 results on the VEC's own pages, though little change in the latter is now likely given the extent of the count.
That conclusion is important, because the Electoral Act 2002 places a requirement on the Court of Disputed Returns to consider whether the result would have been changed in determining petitions challenging election results. Given that the figures suggest that the ALP's misleading campaign might have swung the balance, there appears to be scope for the Greens to challenge the Northcote result in court. Advice from the VEC indicates that this would need to occur within 40 days of the return of the writ, which is anticipated for 16 December.
I should also include here an update on the tally for the seat, as the figures given in my last post were calculated when counting had only been partially completed and things have improved somewhat for the ALP. In 2002, votes comprising 91.37 per cent of the total enrolment were counted, so this suggests that counting for 2006, at 90.36 per cent, must now be down to the very last votes. Given that, how has the ALP fared?
Well, despite an increase of 2.3 per cent in the total enrolment, first-preference votes for the ALP were down from 18,229 for Delahunty in 2002 to 17,470 for Richardson in 2006. The number of informal votes was up 0.5 per cent as a proportion of the total vote (up by 190 to 1624), as were non-voters at 1.0 per cent as a proportion of the total enrolment (about 3721 in 2006, compared to 3257 in 2002).
The upshot is that, despite its misleading campaign, the ALP first preference vote was down by about 2.7 per cent, and engagement in the process also fell away. It could well be that, as well as deceiving voters to vote for them instead of the Greens, the ALP may have turned people away who were uncertain what to believe. If that's a fair and open election, we're setting the bar pretty low.
For those so inclined, the 2002 results can be compared with the 2006 results on the VEC's own pages, though little change in the latter is now likely given the extent of the count.
Wednesday, December 6, 2006
Coverage of ALP Northcote election tactics
It's good to see The Melbourne Times publishing a selection of letters in this week's edition about the misleading campaign carried on by the ALP in Northcote against the Greens leading up to the 25 November State election. Among them was an edited version of my contribution, given here in full:
I was pleased to see Fiona Richardson repeat claims about a Green preference deal with the Liberals, as Northcote voters now have documented evidence that she was deeply implicated in this false allegation, also shamefully advanced by Peter Garrett and the Premier himself in letters to all Northcote electors before the election. And that's in addition to Labor's nocturnal letterboxing of flyers showing the Greens emblem with a picture of Ted Baillieu at its centre.
On election day, as I stood on the steps of Northcote Town Hall with Fiona Richardson and the Labor luminaries turned lackeys for the day, I saw in the questions of concerned voters to the Greens campaigners that these grubby tactics had hit home. For every voter who asked a question, there were doubtless others who voted Labor, improbably fearing that the so-called 'deal' might overturn Labor's 28-seat advantage in the Lower House.
I call on Fiona Richardson to declare the basis on which she argues that the deal existed, to reveal the role of her husband, Stephen Newnham, in her campaign, and to make public the extent of funding devoted to misleading Northcote voters. I want people to know that in this campaign the Labor Party was reading from the Tampa book of election strategy, and should be ashamed for having done so.
As for Richardson's performance as a mere place-holder for the ALP, I note from VEC figures that the Party's first-preference votes dropped by nearly 3,500 from Delahunty's 2002 tally, that there were nearly 6,000 fewer formal votes, and informal votes were also up substantially. In the context of such a dirty campaign, these figures are hardly cause for the arrogance now dripping from our new MP.
There was also coverage in this week's edition of The Northcote Leader on page 5, 'Brown sees red over Green preference claims', the headline referring to the intervention in the issue of Greens Senator, Bob Brown. Let us hope that the Greens pursue their legal challenge over the campaign, and that the ALP's tactics continue to receive the scrutiny they deserve.
Sunday, December 3, 2006
An unlikely dream for independents?
Despite independents polling poorly in general in the State election (I polled a humble 1.54 per cent), there were some notable exceptions. Candidates for Footscray and Ivanhoe polled 15 per cent and ten per cent respectively, and Craig Ingram – the last of the trio of independents from 1999 – retained his seat.
While I do not pretend familiarity or agreement with their individual policies, I take my hat off to them as independents, who I believe must have a continuing role in Victorian politics.
Ingram contributed to the Independents' Charter of 1999, and I saw the Government's shortcomings in regard to the Charter as still relevant to the 2006 election when I decided to run. I considered these matters in an unpublished opinion piece submitted to The Age on 14 November, which I encourage readers to consider as we embark on the long haul to 2010.
While I do not pretend familiarity or agreement with their individual policies, I take my hat off to them as independents, who I believe must have a continuing role in Victorian politics.
Ingram contributed to the Independents' Charter of 1999, and I saw the Government's shortcomings in regard to the Charter as still relevant to the 2006 election when I decided to run. I considered these matters in an unpublished opinion piece submitted to The Age on 14 November, which I encourage readers to consider as we embark on the long haul to 2010.
Subscribe to:
Posts
