A case study in 'broken democracy': the Blue Mountains, NSW

As an example, an official Blue Mountains housing review in 2010 reported that "The low take up of alternative dwelling development opportunities is a matter of considerable concern. There appears to be a serious mismatch between housing supply and demand in the Blue Mountains, and existing policy settings". This has disappeared from Council documents and even been contra-cited in a recentreport which claimed that that review had supported the Council's settings. (The business lobbies seem to be unaware of such aspects of municipal performance.)

Community re-engagement has come to be a special challenge for localism. It will aid a summary if we define a framework of "dimensions of effective democracy" (and indicators of "brokenness"):

The problems and solutions after analysis are seen to be, on the basis of research and consultation with local stakeholders:

Electoral

Voters pick a party/candidate then find cross-party collusion. A 2005 ABC TV Stateline expose highlighted waste which forced economies but changes in 2010 saw regression. Community is given "options" which reflect management values with misleading platitudes – amounting to "pointless consultation". Tourism, economic and like are delegated with only partial accountability, with boards producing political announcements but not successful strategies. Lobbies which are critical of councils in other places are entangled in municipal politics and funding largesse.

Communications

Main perceived issues are at the back of survey reports and not included in the pre-formatting of topics. Definitions and classifications change between years, breaking continuity. Leading citizens take no role in articulating community needs due to cynicism.

Taxation

Taxes have risen out of relationship to services, and incidence differences have been extreme between villages. Official studies said that development imposts impede development of even "employment lands"

Effectiveness

Budgets use activity-based KPIs not outcomes, reflecting managerial "needs", and this cascades down into all other processes. Housing affordability, tourism growth, employment growth, reduced commuting by road and rail and provision of social support etc are not included. Agencies have provided $350,000 for a beer vat, tables and chairs, glassware and cutlery etc for one restaurant's setup which will compete with near non-subsidised competitors.