Let’s look at council cuts

FORCED AMALGAMATION PROGRAMS HAVE NOT ONLY SEEN GOVERNMENTS ROLLED —

BUT THE WORK ITSELF ROLLED BACK AS LOCAL COMMUNITIES DEMAND THEIR COUNCILS BACK

THE vast majority of Tasmanians think we have too many councils – and that result has been remarkably consistent across the two different large-scaled and detailed surveys of readers the

Mercury has conducted over the past year.

The latest is the detailed survey of 2500 people conducted for our Future Tasmania series – a series that will explore the big issues confronting our state over the next two weeks. This latest survey found 75.6 per cent of the respondents said yes there should be fewer councils in Tasmania. When we asked the same question of the 1300 or so who filled in our last survey in December, 76.3 per cent said yes – and 83 per cent said amalgamations should happen where possible.

Tasmania is currently a state of just over 500,000 people served by 29 different councils. That’s an average of one for every 17,000 people. Compare that to, for example, Victoria – where there are 79 councils for 5.5 million people, or an average of one for every 70,000 people. If Tasmania were to achieve the same proportion, there would have just seven councils. Currently there are eight within half an hour of the centre of Hobart. It does all seem a bit silly.

Now, Local Government Association chief Karina Stephenson points out that councils “operate within increasingly diverse social, economic and environmental contexts” – and that “urban and rural communities have different needs and expectations”. And she is absolutely correct. But all of those facts are no reason for not going down the amalgamation path.

But it’s not going to happen. And, as is often the case, the reason is politics. Despite Property Council chief Brian Wightman saying “successive parliaments” have lacked the courage to force amalgamations, as a former MP himself he knows that to do so would be political suicide. We have seen that interstate, where forced amalgamation programs have not only seen governments rolled over the issue – but the work itself rolled back over time as local communities demand their councils back. And that’s the rub: despite all their foibles, people tend to love their own local council.

Perhaps then the way forward is for the Hodgman Government to be taking a much more active role in assisting our smaller rural councils to share as much as possible. Think back-end computer systems, road work machinery, even rubbish collection. Sharing more would reduce the pressure on ratepayers, and free up cash for councils to spend on more important stuff. Some councils have already done some of this, and others are investigating what might work. It’s an idea well worth supporting.

Back in Hobart, meanwhile, and it is time we had a serious discussion about merging at least some of the city’s four main councils. Currently on the western side of the river we have a city council that makes all the money, a suburban council that is crying poor, and a council to the south that is caught between serving its rural constituents and massive suburban growth. All three of those mayors get along quite well. If any are thinking of a lasting legacy from their time in office it might be time to start considering what proactive role they could play in a potential greater Hobart merger.

Responsibility for all editorial comment is taken by the Editor, Chris Jones, Level 1, 2 Salamanca Square, Hobart, TAS, 7000