The 'visionary' council mergers leave many out in the cold

The much debated, defended and criticised council reform process has moved a step towards conclusion with the drawing of the new boundaries. The media are having a field day while the young Minister for Local Government, Planning and Sport, Andrew Fraser, and Premier Peter Beattie proclaim visionary foresight necessary to lead the state forward.

The grounds for this visionary thinking are very much reflective of the past. During the 1950’s and 1960’s, Labor realised that to become elected in a prosperous post-war economy, they would need to transform from a party of the “battlers” to become a modern party appealing to middle income electors. This led to the recruitment of academics and professionals who became known as “the technocrats”.

Playford and Kirsner (1972), say the “technocrats” embraced large corporations as the badge of “modernity, efficiency and rationality”. Conversely, small scale was “anarchic and inefficient”. It is this philosophy that now seems to have come into play with the local government reforms in Queensland.

So what is the situation on the ground in a “reformed” new regional government area?

New local government districts differ in representation. All Indigenous communities are to have divided representation that ensures each community group has a representative councillor. Non Indigenous councils comprise undivided representation based upon numerical parameters and a mayor (explained below). Is this racism or discrimination?

Divided Indigenous councils comprise internal divisions or wards. They would be very similar to the existing local government system. Undivided non Indigenous councils, recommended for all non Indigenous councils, will have no internal divisions. This will be very different to the existing structure and lends itself to concentration of political and economic power through population distribution.

More importantly, the difference in representation is profound. In non Indigenous regional councils, population distribution will drive the decision making process. Political and economic power will reside in geographically dominant groups. Less densely populated areas with limited voting power will have to trade their support for concessions. Their success will depend upon the level of dominance bestowed by geographical distribution of the elected councillors and their followers.

The proposed Dalby Regional Council is a classic example for discussion. It will comprise the former shires of Dalby, Wambo, Chinchilla, Tara, Murilla and division two of Taroom. If we assume that population in the Taroom Shire divides equally between division one and division two, then population based upon 2006 data is a total of 30,283, made up as follows:

• Dalby: 10,536;
• Wambo: 5,446;
• Chinchilla: 6,316;
• Tara: 3,938;
• Murilla : 2,783; and
• Taroom (division two): 1,264.

Eight councillors and a mayor are recommended for the new Dalby Regional Council. Consequently, each councillor represents 3,785 residents.

The former shires of Dalby and Wambo were a doughnut configuration. Dalby was the town council while Wambo represented the surrounding rural population The population of Dalby and Wambo combined will be 15,982 residents: geographically these two are situated on the extreme eastern side of the new regional entity. The combined population of these former two shires will represent just less than 53 per cent of the new Dalby Regional Council’s total residents. The remaining percentage breakdown of total population will be:

• Chinchilla - 20.8 per cent;
• Tara - 13 per cent;
• Murilla  - 9.2 per cent; and
• Taroom - 4.2 per cent.

Statistically, Dalby together with Wambo could elect 4.2 councillors and most likely the mayor. Chinchilla could elect 1.7 councillors whilst Tara 1.04. The western extremity of the new regional area of Murilla and Taroom will elect 0.7 and 0.3 councillors respectively. What a statistical mess for a “visionary” political system aiming to deliver equitable and just representation.

Murilla and Taroom will have to co-operate to elect one councillor. Chinchilla and Tara could combine to elect three councillors. This would leave Dalby and Wambo four councillors plus the mayor. Political and economic power will reside geographically in the eastern extremity of the Regional Council.

If electors from the eastern end of Chinchilla and Tara (both adjoin Wambo) supported a Wambo candidate, the situation becomes ever more geographically distorted. Five councillors from the former Dalby-Wambo Shires plus the mayor would come from the eastern extremity of the Region. This would recreate a mini Queensland situation with political and economic power dominated by a small densely populated geographic area.

Both the premier and minister have said that the way is still open for the new system to be divided into wards. It has been left to a group of western mayors to devise a system of division. When the statistics of the new Dalby Regional Council is considered, there can be no equitable representation unless it is heavily gerrymandered in favour of the numerically weak areas.

Candidate selection becomes crucial. Talented candidates could find themselves unable to command sufficient electoral support compared to lesser talented; but, more popular personalities. Numerical strength will reside in the towns. In other words, town candidates are more likely to win a council seat than farmers. Hence rural industry representation is most likely to decline at regional level with an impairment of diversity of thought and industry representation in regional politics.

The outcome of this situation will provide party politics an opportunity to enter regional government. It has always been a point of local government pride that official party politics has been unable to capture interest at local government level. This must end for any semblance of representation to emerge. While town representation would normally be the repository of Liberal and Labor interests, resentment generated from this reform could well work against Labor across the board reaching to the federal level.

The distance from Dalby town to Wandoan (division 2, Taroom) is 194km. An equivalent example for a Brisbane residents would be to have a councillor elected from Tiaro (south of Maryborough). Conversely, because the numerical power lies in  Brisbane, a Tiaro resident would be represented most likely by a Brisbane councillor. This system cannot be explained except by philosophy.

This reform process reflects the philosophical thinking of the technocrats recruited by Labor’s in the 1950’s and 60’s internal reform process. The question now becomes: is this the first wave of neo-technocratic philosophy?

Philosophical thinking from the past is no basis to go forward for regional Queensland.