The importance of naming our regions

The Dalby Regional Council is not located on unknown territory. It is located right in the heart of that very famous geographical region of Australia known as the Darling Downs. It is not the only regional council on the Darling Downs but it is by far the largest geographically.

It also almost duplicates the parliamentary region of the Darling Downs for which the current Member of Parliament is Ray Hopper of the Liberal National Party. By sliding the Darling Downs Political Region on the map about a hundred kilometers (62 miles) to the north-west, it would cover almost exactly the same area as the Dalby Regional Council. Or, inversely, by sliding the Dalby Regional Council zone on the map about 100 kilometers to the south-east, again, it would cover almost exactly the same area as the Darling Downs Political Region. For an area of 38,000 square kilometers (nearly 15,000 square miles) that is a fairly marginal difference, particularly considering the small populations involved. The gains and losses tend to cancel out.

So there are in fact two almost identical regions which overlap, one representing the state parliament the other representing local government, both located on the Darling Downs.

The similarity between the two is not just limited to their geographical locations: the size of population they represent is also similar - 35,000 for the parliamentary region and 30,000 for the council region. It is largely the same electors voting for the same mayor and the same parliamentary representative at the same local government and parliamentary elections. The electorate office of the Member of Parliament for the Darling Downs is located at 14A Cunningham Street Dalby, just a ten minutes walk from the Dalby Regional Council offices at 107 Drayton Street.

Local governments do not usually change their names. The Dalby Town Council, for example, did not change its name in the 145 years of its existence. The new regional council would not need to change its name either if it had been given a “neutral” regional name in the recent amalgamations rather than the name of one of the towns in the region.

The Local Government Reform Commission simply indicated that the new administrative regions did not have to correspond to the geographical regions. It made no reference at all to the parliamentary regions which also happen to be located in the same geographical areas and overlap with the new administrative and geographical regions. Instead of comparing all three regions: geographical, administrative and parliamentary, it only took into account the geographical and administrative regions. It then opted for a general rule that each administrative region was to bear the name of its largest town.

Inevitably, merging town and shire councils into regional councils obliterates the historical and cultural identity of vast sectors of the community. It also puts a damper on the social image and political ambitions of large numbers of local notabilities. Unless correctly addressed, these factors are potential sources of internal conflict. Finding the right name is part of the process of defusing possible sources of friction and dissatisfaction.

One hundred and forty-five years is a long time. The next change will not come soon. We had better make sure we get it right. “What’s in a name?” one might ask. “That which we call a rose, by any other name would smell as sweet” replies Shakespeare. True, but only if one considers the object rather than the name. The name “rose” evokes a beautiful object that smells sweet, whereas the name “toilet”, for example, evokes an object that is not particularly beautiful and does not smell sweet. Different names evoke different objects. By the same token, when the mayor or the priest says “I name you man and wife” he is not just making polite conversation; he is binding the couple hand and foot in wedlock with mutual legal and moral obligations that could prove quite costly in the long run. The verbal “naming” in this context has force of contract. It would be an error to think that a name is merely an arbitrary label as Shakespeare suggests. When correctly employed it epitomizes identity, reputation, social standing, cultural background and basically everything a person or, in this case, a region, stands for.

So what is the right name? The right name for the region can (but not necessarily) be the name of the largest town in that region. It is the right name, for example, when the “town” happens to be Brisbane, the state capital, or Toowoomba, Queensland’s largest inland city. Whatever the name is, it should be one that everyone can identify with and one which preserves the cultural heritage of the region. Whilst the motor for regional council amalgamation is obviously financial and economic, the road to successful amalgamation is, without the slightest doubt, more of a social and cultural nature. Socially and culturally, we are not starting out from scratch. We have already come a long way but we still have a long way to go.

It is important we seize this rare, historical opportunity not just to preserve but also to enhance the cultural heritage of the region. There is absolutely no need to invent a new name. It would have been quite simple to adopt the name our forefathers in the region bequeathed to us, the name Allan Cunningham gave the region in 1828 when he first crossed the Great Dividing Range and discovered it: the Darling Downs.

There can be no doubt that the intentions of the Dalby Regional Council are honourable in not wishing to claim the sole right to the term “Darling Downs”, but no other region has expressed an interest in adopting the term and, more importantly, the State Government authorities have clearly indicated that the boundaries of the new administrative regions do not have to correspond to those of the geographical regions. In other words, the Dalby Regional Council does not have to cover the whole of the Darling Downs geographical region for it to bear the name: Darling Downs Regional Council.

The region has a good case for staking a claim for the cultural heritage of our forefathers (or our “patriarchs”, as Banjo Paterson likes to call them). Unfortunately, it has failed to do so, perhaps simply due to an excess of prudence and modesty on the part of our local representatives. The problem is that if neither Dalby nor any of the other local government regions adopts the name it will fade into the mist of time and be forgotten. It is important that our local representatives and all those concerned in the region become conscious of the fact that for “the famous Darling Downs”, to remain “famous”, the term should not only be adopted but also promoted in every aspect of the community’s regional activities, and, in particular, the activities of local government.

Culture is an extremely precious and highly vulnerable asset of any civilisation and merits consideration and respect. We have a lot to learn from the aborigines in this regard. We also have a lot to learn from the French whom I, personally, have gotten to know quite well during the many years that I have been living and working in Paris. In the case of the Notre Dame cathedral, for example, from the time they laid the first stone in 1163 until the cathedral was finally consecrated by the Archbishop of Paris in 1864, 700 years of construction had been patiently carried out. That was the result of team work that involved more than 23 generations of the country’s best craftsmen. It would have been impossible if each new generation considered it did not have the right to continue the work of its predecessors and chose to build its own cathedral. There would be no Notre Dame, no Chateau de Versailles, no Louvre Museum worthy of housing Michelangelo’s famous painting, the Mona Lisa, and little or no cultural heritage at all.

In its “eNews” of Monday June 16, 2008, the Dalby Regional Council quoted the Mayor, Cr Ray Brown, as stating: “thanks to a group of 40 participants made up of Councillors, staff and 20 community representatives across the region, under the guidance of an independent facilitator, Council now has a list of original name suggestions to consider. Council will decide which names are short-listed for further consideration at its next ordinary meeting to be held 9.30am Wednesday 18 June at the Chinchilla Customer Service Centre.”

It is a pity the Dalby Regional Council chose, without any further discussion or consultation of the wider regional community, to submit only two names to electors at its name change referendum in August: Greater Downs Regional Council and Western Downs Regional Council, indicating, while so doing, that both suggested names evoked “Queensland’s famous Darling Downs” which “identifies that the region is rich in agriculture, manufacturing and natural resources with a wealth of opportunities on offer”.

Unfortunately, Council has, perhaps unwittingly, deprived electors of voting for the one name that does not content itself with simply “evoking” Queensland’s famous Darling Downs but proudly proclaims it frankly and openly: Darling Downs Regional Council.

Despite constant efforts and numerous e-mails to Council, the only response that has been forthcoming so far indicated that the name suggestion Darling Downs Regional Council had been duly registered for consideration. That was over a couple of months ago when Council called for name suggestions to be submitted for the “preselection” process in preparation of the referendum. All subsequent e-mails have remained unanswered.

It now behoves the Minister for Local Government or possibly the Local Government Boundary and Electoral Commission to decide what appropriate action should be taken, both in relation to the manner in which the short list was established, and also in relation to the very small choice of names submitted to the vote of electors. There is little comfort in the thought that Council did appear to want to be seen as doing things democratically by setting up a community “workshop” and paying an “independent facilitator” as, unfortunately, it was unable to resist the temptation of drawing up the short list itself without consulting anybody. There is not much to rejoice about either as regards the contents of the “short list”. “Short” is a euphemism to describe a list containing two items only. “Scanty” would seem to be a more appropriate term.

Council seems to have done everything it could to bridle and harness the electorate, directing it exactly where it wanted it to go, leading it along with a nice juicy (democratic) carrot dangling in front of its eyes. Unfortunately, at every step, the “carrot” proved unattainable.

As a final anecdote, it is interesting to note that according to the Queensland Heritage Register which can be consulted on the Queensland Government web site, the only currently certified listing that has “Darling Downs” included in its name is a building dating from the 1930’s located at 133 Cunningham Street Dalby. It was the former Dalby Town Council Chambers and Offices. To quote the register: “The building is no longer the seat of local government and is currently occupied by Education Queensland and houses offices of the Darling Downs Northern School Support Centre”.

The new Dalby Regional Council offices are located just a few blocks down the street and around the corner on Drayton Street but, unfortunately, unlike the old Town Council Chambers, the new offices do not appear to qualify for listing in the Queensland Heritage Register.

It is regrettable to be taking a half-hearted approach to our cultural heritage. We should be going all out for it with confidence and determination, adopting it with open arms, making it part of our lives and adding our best contribution before carrying it forward for future generations to enjoy and embellish in their turn. The Darling Downs is our Notre Dame Cathedral. It is high time we rolled up our sleeves and went to work on it.