
From 6 – 8 October residents across Moreland received their ballot papers in the mail, marking the formal beginning of the hotly anticipated Moreland Council elections. Much of the campaigning has now dwindled as candidates keenly await the results at the end of October.
For some people the local election is just another government threat of a fine for not doing something. For others, the outcome of the election is the difference between a Moreland that is responsive to the needs and desires of the community and one that sticks to the famous ‘triple R’ mandate: ‘roads, rates and rubbish’.
Since the late 90s, local councils across Victoria have been shifting from a triple R remit to being more involved in dictating the shape of the municipality they govern. Housing and community services, implementing climate change policies and providing funding for campaigns and local groups are areas in which local councils are steadily getting more involved. According to the legislation, the Moreland Council (and all local councils) have a lot of freedom to do what is ‘necessary or convenient’ for the proper performance of its role. Its role is simply defined as providing good governance for the benefit and wellbeing of the community.
Practically speaking, however, this power can be (and is often) stymied in a variety of ways by the other levels of government. For example, local council decisions can be overthrown by VCAT challenges and state MPs. Just recently in Stonnington, State Planning Minister Richard Wynne approved an aged care home in Prahran that had been rejected twice by the local council at the behest of locals.
Another example of the other levels of government reducing the power of local councils can be seen in funding. Because local governments don’t have many avenues for raising revenue, many local governments rely on grants from the state and federal governments in order to build works or fund initiatives. This means that the relationship between local councils and other levels of government is seen as important to maintain, lest funding opportunities are lost. We saw an example of this play out with the Upfield line redevelopment; in this instance Council was reticent to back
local demands for greater consultation.
As it stands, council rates are the single most important source of own-revenue for local governments — which is why efforts to cut local council rates on properties should be understood as a limit on the council’s ability to independently fund programs or initiatives that would otherwise struggle to get off the ground. ‘Rates’ are essentially just referring to taxes on property and charges on certain permits. Victoria’s council rates are capped by the state MP for Local Government every year. For the 2019-20 financial year, the property rates were capped at 2.5 per cent.
The pandemic has highlighted the importance of local, robust communities that are able to provide viable alternatives to the usual global-scale dispersed system that previously supported us. The 5km bubble that we have been confined to under Stage 4 restrictions has shown us that we do care about there being green spaces, that we do care about fresh food being locally available and that we do want there to be community groups that provide top quality and consistent care to vulnerable people. We want a municipality that can step up when parts of the global-scale system
shut down in the future.
The Moreland Council has a history of stepping up. In 1930, for example, Coburg Council was funding up to three days of work a week for 500 residents. It also provided a freeze on the need to pay rates (unfortunately interest was added to the arrears). Not all of this expanded power was put to a good cause, however. At around the same time, the then-named Coburg Council perpetuated the shameful White Australia Policy by implementing a rule where 90 per cent of council jobs would be given to either British or Australian-born people. This serves as a grim reminder of the importance of having a diverse and principled council that can stand against the other levels of government if needed. In more recent years, the Moreland Council has occasionally demonstrated such a willingness. For example, in 2014 the Moreland Council made a joint decision with Yarra Council to respond to community outrage and fund legal action in the Supreme Court against the then-Liberal state government’s decision to approve the controversial East West Link.
There is still an ideological rift between people who see the role of local council as being one that maintains the municipality through a triple R mandate, and those who think that local councils should be responsive to the many and varied needs and challenges faced by residents. Whilst a more involved local council runs the risk of implementing or expanding bigoted policies from the other levels of government, if a progressive, transparent, diverse council is elected and the councillors are trying to do their best, we might see a municipality that can stand on its own two feet during a crisis and support all residents irrespective of their status or challenges.
Regardless of where you stand in the debate on the role of councils, it is clear that local council have radical potential.
By SAS & BB









