Queensland's burning - local government amalgamations Beattie-style

The pragmatic and cautious Beattie Government elected in 1998 continued with this policy. Even as the Beattie Government gained record majorities in subsequent elections, collaboration and co-operation with local government was the order of the day as shown by the regular renewal of a memorandum of understanding between the Queensland Government and the Local Government Association of Queensland (LGAQ) and state government support for the LGAQ’s Size, Shape and Sustainability (SSS) review into the viability of local government and voluntary amalgamation.

The Beattie Government’s 2007 local government initiatives

It is against this background that Premier Beattie’s sudden and unexpected announcement of the external review of local government boundaries in April this year needs to be appreciated. Overnight this ended the SSS review process. It immediately placed local government amalgamation on the agenda and ended the previous consultation process.

Because the Beattie Government did not mention its intentions during the 2006 State election and supported the SSS review until a couple of days before announcing the external review, many in local government believe that they had been duped by the Beattie Government by a process of deliberate subterfuge and a false sense of participation. The Beattie Government’s decision promoted a great sense of betrayal among local governments. As Councillor Paul Bell, State President of the LGAQ lamented:

Why kill the Size, Shape, and Sustainability? Why not confide in local government if the state was unhappy with progress ... Why the deceitful charade over the first three months of the year (i.e. 2007). The LGAQ was deceived, so were mayors and council CEOs, even the Independent Review Facilitators (of the SSS process) right up to the very last day.

Furthermore, the seven-person external review was seen by many in local government as being neither as expert nor as independent as the government contended and that the review’s outcome was largely predetermined. This perception was reinforced by the rushed process and limited consultation. From the start to when the new legislation was passed in a one-night sitting, the whole process took less than four months. As one local government constituent complained:

... the so called Independent Local Government Review Commission ... were given just three months to consider more than 36,000 submissions from 156 councils. The outcome was preordained as the Commission was under instructions to redefine boundaries, but not given time to conduct a rigorous “cost benefit” analysis or a cultural impact study based on amalgamation experience in other parts of Australia.

This rushed process in parliament again highlighted Queensland’s notorious lack of legislative scrutiny of executive government actions. Nevertheless, the consultative processes of local government amalgamations under the Beattie Government were in contrast to the more extensive consultative processes of previous Labor and Coalition administrations. Also recent processes seemed contrary to accepted norms of consultative processes for good policy development.

Indeed, the Beattie Government’s promise on coming to office to “listen” to the electorate through a complex ritual of community cabinets, forums, and regional parliament, has been replaced in relation to local government amalgamation, by a more autocratic approach to policy development. It seems that the Beattie Government has even ignored the advice of its own Policy Handbook that stressed, “consultation is an integral part of the policy process and should be a normal part of government’s operations ... (and) needs to occur throughout policy development”.

Further undermining the democratic process was the Beattie Government’s threat to take action against any council seeking to hold a referendum on the issue. Initially, the government amended the legislation to fine such local governments, but later the Beattie Government decided such councils would be dismissed, and amended the legislation again. As the Local Government Minister warned:

Staging a referendum will be an explicit trigger for immediate dismissal of individual councils. If a council has already started a poll they must take all necessary steps to ensure that the poll does not go ahead ... If a council declines to desist and goes ahead with plans for referendums, they will be dismissed without notice. Administrators will be appointed to any councils that are dismissed.

No Queensland government has treated its local government or its citizens so crudely. However, with federal government amending the Commonwealth Electoral Act to allow the Australian Electoral Commission to conduct the local government referendums, the Beattie Government relented and subsequently altered the legislation yet again to remove its ability to sack such councils. Now the Beattie Government has stated it will ignore the result of any referendums!

Motivations

Why the Beattie Government embarked on amalgamation at this critical time in the federal electoral cycle is difficult to assess. Certainly, the Beattie Government’s prime justification for amalgamation has been that the creation of larger councils will be more efficient, but such alleged efficiencies have long been hard to prove in relation to local government amalgamation. Critics of the amalgamations argue that there were serious flaws in the Beattie Government’s evidence in this area. Other suggestions by the Premier that resistance to “reform” was because local councillors would lose their income was crass, ignoring the fact many councillors receive only nominal pay and do considerable community work at great personal expense.