The second tranche of local government reforms aims to crack down on problem councils and help those open to resource sharing.
A CASUAL scroll through any number of community Facebook pages invariably builds a damning picture of local government as inept, slow to act, and even uncaring.
Occasionally the criticism is justified, often it is directed at the wrong tier of government, and almost always it inflicts reputational damage.
The sporadic cases of councils behaving badly always make for a juicy news headline, which amplifies the broader view of a sector out of its depth.
Perceptions are one thing, according to Local Government Minister Hannah Beazley, but the facts rarely support those negative opinions.
“We have got a lot of well-functioning local governments with a lot of incredibly professional CEOs, staff members and really committed elected members,” Ms Beazley told Business News.
“I get disappointed when I see immature behaviour from elected members or others, because it affects the reputation of the whole sector.
“I think that’s an incredibly unfair thing to do to your fellow elected members.”
It is those bad eggs and inexperienced individuals the state government is seeking to rein-in through the second tranche of its local government reforms, which were read into parliament last month.
Key to the reforms will be the establishment of an independent inspector, monitors, adjudicators, and beefed-up inquiry and investigation capabilities.
A function of the new model will be for complainants to take their issues to the inspector instead of council chief executives, who may believe their freedom to act is compromised by the fact their ongoing employment rests with councillors.
Inspectors will determine whether the complaint is legitimate or not and proceed on that basis. Frivolous and vexatious complaints will get short shrift.
The reforms aim to foster a soft-touch approach to helping councils overcome minor issues and deal effectively with big problems when required.
“When an inspector deems that a complaint warrants further investigation, investigators can be sent in to get to the bottom of whatever that issue is,” Ms Beazley said.
“That investigator can then make suggestions to the inspector, whether that be to send in the monitor, close the complaint, or put the local government on an improvement plan.
“The monitors I see as the really key early intervention mechanism.
“A monitor or a team of monitors [can] build capacity within that local government to ensure consistent problems don’t keep on recurring, or indeed provide the skills and support that they need.
“There are a lot more tools at the inspector’s disposal than what currently exists, and a bit more teeth and enforceability around it as well.”
At the most serious end, councillors can be suspended, their pay docked, and a 10-year ban imposed for repeat offences.
Ms Beazley expects a heavy workload due to “pent-up” issues in the inspector’s first years of operation.
Another measure under the package will be to introduce a hiring panel to help to weed out the purple circle phenomenon: mates hiring mates, nepotism.
That panel will be empowered to build a list of qualified independent people to sit around the table when local governments hire new chief executives.
“I think that’s really key to ensuring that every local government is following that direction of appointment by merit and experience, and not necessarily through personal relationships or even good luck,” Ms Beazley said.
“Having that consistent panel of people, you get to know the sector very, very well.
“They will be able to see themselves if there are people shifting around without contributing anything to the sector.”
Amalgamation
It is for good reason that the word ‘amalgamation’ features frequently in discussions about local government in Western Australia.
There are 139 local government areas in the state, nearly half of those home to fewer than 2,000 residents.
Eleven of the 20 smallest councils in Australia are in WA.
Three of those – Murchison, Cue, and Sandstone – have fewer than 200 residents, according to the Australian Bureau of Statistics.
Murchison does not even have a town.
The state government resisted submissions pressing the case for the reforms to force amalgamation, instead pushing voluntary mergers and resource sharing.
“Unfortunately, the previous government completely botched that amalgamation agenda,” Ms Beazley said.
“Some of our regions are like, ‘We absolutely don’t want to share. We’re good and we’re viable’. “And that is fine.”
Ms Beazley’s dig at previous efforts was a reference to the Barnett government’s attempt to halve the number of Perth councils, which failed when Labor won the 2017 state election.
Tranche two reforms will better define the roles and expectations of executive staff to administrate multiple local governments, and for councillors to be able to perform committee duties across multiple local governments.
Ultimately, Ms Beazley said, factors outside of a council’s control may give the final nudge into resource sharing or amalgamation.
“I do think that no matter if they are a well-functioning and viable local government … there are real workforce challenges in WA at the moment,” she said.
“Even if they are fantastically run local governments, it doesn’t necessarily mean they are going to be able to attract the workforce they need, just because of the competition in the sector.
“That ability, that if they need to turn on that shared function, they are able to, is really valuable.”
Tranche one
Introduction of the new package follows passage of tranche one reforms in May last year.
Measures passed under that tranche include live streaming of meetings, publishing of chief executive key performance indicators, and allowing for the accrual of long-service leave across local government jobs.
The long-service provision, Ms Beazley said, was important for improving workforce development and retention.
Chief executive KPIs have started to appear in local government agendas, but Ms Beazley said there was still some regulatory work to do.
“To ensure the CEOs and their representative bodies are comfortable with what that looks like, so CEOs are both highly accountable, as they should be as the chief administrator of any local government, but that it’s not a situation where it is weaponised,” she said.
“It is a controversial aspect, publishing CEOs’ KPIs.
“But, by and large, considering the ratepayers are paying the salary of that CEO and everyone under their management, I think ratepayers and council members have a right to know.”
Live streaming of meetings has been broadly adopted by tier one and two councils, but holdouts remain.
Those councils have until January 1 next year to get the cameras rolling.
Meanwhile, it had been hoped the reforms would improve voter turnout.
Last year, they did not.
Turnout is still sticky, at about 31 per cent.
“People do get election fatigue, so they are not compelled to vote at local elections,” Ms Beazley said.
“We can build on the work we did for the 2023 elections, particularly in terms of activating our multicultural and First Nations communities … and our young people as well.
“There are still too many people in the community who think [local government] is roads, rates and rubbish.
“It’s so much more than that, when you’re considering housing development, small business, community activation.”
Ms Beazley hopes the tranche two reforms can be passed prior to caretaker mode coming in ahead of the 2025 state election in March.
With a large legislative agenda and 21 sitting days left this year at time of print, it could be a tall order.
Failing that, the next council elections held in late 2025 loom as a target for the new suite of policies to come
