With the Spring Carnival Circus event coming to a close we are left to ponder why John So decided to not run for a third term? Surely if he stood he would have been elected? So why did he not stand again?
John is a likeable person, you can not help but smile and enjoy a conversation with him.
The answer to the question "Why did john not stand for a third term?" lies with Catherine Ng, John So's lead candidate in 2001 and 2004.
Take a walk down China Town and you will see just how divided they are. Peter McMullin with the support of John So and Kevin Louey have been actively campaigning within the Chinese Community. McMullin's poster's are on display, but as is often the case in the Chinese community, the real decisions are made in quite on the street and in the Chinese community newspapers where Catherine Ng has not been doing so well. Peter McMullin/Keven Louey have been doing extremely well in China Town, just how well will not be known until the weekend when the ballot is counted
Talk around Town Hall has it that John could no longer work with Catherine Ng, which explains why John had not openly supported Catherine Ng's bid to succeed him. Instead he has backed Peter McMullin and Gary Singer to be he replacement as Melbourne's next Lord Mayor.
There is no doubt that many of the negative issues surrounding John So's leadership are connected back to Catherine Ng. If this election is close as most expect it will be then it is the Chinese community that will decide which direction Melbourne will head.
The Melbourne Chinese community, which represents around 13% of the electorate, is divided.
The Chinese community is well aware of the fallout between John So and Catherine Ng. It is ear as daylight as John has not embraced Cathrine's campaign. John So is reported and having said that he and his wife can not get on with Catherine. They no longer talk to each other. It would have been wrong for John and Catherine to be publicly seen to be at odds with each other. Rather then try and force her out John decided to not contest the next election.
Catherine Ng has been the subject of a number of complaints within the town hall of harassment and abuse staff. Catherine is on the nose with many from the Chinese community she can not count on the level of support that was given to John So.
If Catherine can manage to secure more votes then Peter McMullin then yes she has a chance of becoming Melbourne's second Chinese born Lord Mayor. Catherine Ng is best placed in terms of the various preference deals that are on the table, she collects preferences from just about everyone, but I would not throw the IChing dice just yet.
Showing posts with label John So. Show all posts
Showing posts with label John So. Show all posts
Tuesday, November 25, 2008
Monday, November 10, 2008
So and Bracks - Lord Mayor's Endorsement McMullins bid for the Lord Mayor's gold chains receives a boost
IN a bold statement of support former ALP Victorian Premier, Steve Bracks, and outgoing Lord Mayor, John So, have teamed up to support Peter McMullin's bid for the keys to the Limo and Melbourne's Gold Chains and Mayoralty Robes.
John So's tacit endorsement has placed at odds Catherine Ng and Garry Singer's chances of winning. Both Singer and Ng were key players in John So's Team.
Garry singer was John So's running mate and Deputy Lord Mayor in 2004 and Catherine Ng was So's number one "Lead Candidate" for the Council.
John So's support for Peter McMullin is a slap in the face and a final act of betrayal. It has been common knowledge around Clown Hall that John So could no longer work with Catherine Ng and that she had played a pivotal role in John So's decision to retire and not to seek a third term of office as Melbourne's "Favorite" Lord Mayor.
Backs and So's endorsement has added fuel and fire to McMullin's campaign which got off to a poor start when McMullin preferenced his main opponent Robert Doyle ahead of the pack. (See McMullin reconsiders preference recomendation)
Steve Brack's clearly places the ALP stamp of approval on McMullin's bid for office ahead of young Will Fowles' fresh and green team. John So's approval has given him that extra edge over his other rivals Catherine Ng and Garry Singer putting McMullin back into contention for a possible win.
Saturday, October 11, 2008
John So leaves office Having failed to deliver on promises leaving behind a mountain of debt and uncertainly
Council's efforts fail despite extra $64m
by Kate Lahey The Age October 11, 2008
MELBOURNE City Council has failed to meet almost a third of its benchmarks for the past year, despite raking in an extra $64 million through rates, fines and grants, its annual report shows.
Of the 48 "deliverables" the council set for itself in 2007-08, only 30 were completed.
Among its disappointments are a review of heritage precincts that did not occur and a failure to compile and publish the results of the 2005-06 green building retrofit program.
Despite a memorandum of understanding between the city, State Government and the Seattle Trade Development Alliance, nothing has happened, the report says.
The council has also failed to secure a new site for the Melbourne Wholesale Fish Market. The annual report says traders will be kicked out by the end of March, without any chance of a new home before late 2010.
The report, released last night, shows Cr Fiona Snedden claimed the highest amount of expenses, $37,000, of which $9000 was for child care and $18,000 for overseas travel. Lord Mayor John So claimed more than $20,000, of which $14,000 was for overseas travel.
As at June 30, the City of Melbourne employed 1139 people, more than 10% of them on more than $100,000 a year, excluding councillors and the chief executive.
The council's total consolidated revenue was $425 million and its consolidated surplus for the financial year was $98 million.
by Kate Lahey The Age October 11, 2008
MELBOURNE City Council has failed to meet almost a third of its benchmarks for the past year, despite raking in an extra $64 million through rates, fines and grants, its annual report shows.
Of the 48 "deliverables" the council set for itself in 2007-08, only 30 were completed.
Among its disappointments are a review of heritage precincts that did not occur and a failure to compile and publish the results of the 2005-06 green building retrofit program.
Despite a memorandum of understanding between the city, State Government and the Seattle Trade Development Alliance, nothing has happened, the report says.
The council has also failed to secure a new site for the Melbourne Wholesale Fish Market. The annual report says traders will be kicked out by the end of March, without any chance of a new home before late 2010.
The report, released last night, shows Cr Fiona Snedden claimed the highest amount of expenses, $37,000, of which $9000 was for child care and $18,000 for overseas travel. Lord Mayor John So claimed more than $20,000, of which $14,000 was for overseas travel.
As at June 30, the City of Melbourne employed 1139 people, more than 10% of them on more than $100,000 a year, excluding councillors and the chief executive.
The council's total consolidated revenue was $425 million and its consolidated surplus for the financial year was $98 million.
Wednesday, October 01, 2008
So Long, Fair Well So sings his last hit as he announces his long overdue departure from Office
LORD Mayor John So won’t stand for re-election. (unedited)
John So Lord mayor of Melebourne 2001 to 2008
Transcript of John So'[s Farewell speech
“Good morning, thank you for joining me.
It has been 17 years since I entered the doors of Melbourne Town Hall as a Councillor.
Those years have been a period of transformation; of new beginnings for Council and the city it represents.
Melbourne has become the city the world and Australia talks about - a place where people from all nations and all backgrounds are invited to contribute.
In environmental management, urban planning and cultural expression we have become a model for capital cities once considered our superior.
We set ourselves a goal of becoming one of the world’s most liveable cities – we succeeded three times in under a decade.
This year we set ourselves a goal of becoming one of the world’s most sustainable cities – just four weeks ago, we were recognised as being in the top ten sustainable cities globally.
Growth of the city’s businesses and residents has brought life back to the city centre.
Melbourne is forecast to be Australia’s largest city within 20 years.
These are achievements that define a city and build a sense of pride among citizens.
They are achievements that require courage of conviction and a steady approach to leadership.
The Melbourne Living team has brought stability back to capital city governance.
We’ve maintained the focus on achieving outcomes for the community and business in Melbourne.
We’ve regained the trust of governments and voters.
One of my personal goals has been recognition of the vital role capital cities play in securing quality of life for the majority of Australians.
The City of Melbourne now enjoys strong partnerships not only with the State but Canberra as well.
Effective policy is something my team has never lost sight of.
We have achieved the vision and most of our policy commitments made at every election.
Among them are some of history’s defining moments:
• The Commonwealth Games will be remembered as one of the greatest and most seamless events ever staged in this city;
• Integration of Docklands has created one of the world’s most exciting waterfront domains;
• And multi million dollar investment in services and infrastructure has made the city of Melbourne a fantastic place to live, work and enjoy.
While busy achieving the vision we set ourselves, we’ve kept focus on the horizon.
The City has completed the most ambitious community consultation project ever undertaken in its history - Future Melbourne, which was endorsed by the Council last night.
Drawing on the collective intelligence and ambitions of 15,000 individuals, businesses and organisations, we now have a vision ‘for the people by the people’.
That vision is backed by a Government in such good financial shape: it has a AAA credit rating, is debt free and has strong cash reserves.
After integrating Docklands into the city, building CH2, Australia’s first 6-star green office building, contributing $43 million to the Convention Centre precinct, and staging the Commonwealth Games – all while delivering the lowest rate increases in Victoria in the past 8 years – we have a balance sheet that is the envy of governments Australia-wide.
I have called you here today to make this announcement.
After deep consideration, I have decided not to stand for re-election.
This decision has been one of the most difficult I have ever made.
I’ve given almost a quarter of my life to public service and, in return, it has given me many of the most rewarding experiences of my life.
You cannot work at 110% forever, and that’s what this job requires.
I am confident this is the right decision – it’s time to pass the baton.
The future Council inherits a solid foundation to drive the city forward.
And I still have keen interests I wish to pursue.
This city has a lot to gain from the connections it holds with the region.
I’m looking forward to the new possibilities presented by Australia’s increasing international engagement.
There are many people I must thank for the opportunities afforded me.
I wish to thank my Deputy, Gary Singer, former Deputy Lord Mayor Susan Riley and the Councillors on my team who have given so much to the city they represent.
Together, we ensured the people of Melbourne have always come first.
I want to thank City of Melbourne management and staff, particularly my Chief of Staff Kevin Louey.
To my supportive family, my children Nat, Alex, Eva and John, and my wife Wendy, what can I say? I love you all.
Finally, I want to thank the people of this great city.
Thank you for the faith, trust and encouragement you have given me.
Thank you for the privilege and opportunity.
Thank you Melbourne.’’
John So Lord mayor of Melebourne 2001 to 2008
Transcript of John So'[s Farewell speech
“Good morning, thank you for joining me.It has been 17 years since I entered the doors of Melbourne Town Hall as a Councillor.
Those years have been a period of transformation; of new beginnings for Council and the city it represents.
Melbourne has become the city the world and Australia talks about - a place where people from all nations and all backgrounds are invited to contribute.
In environmental management, urban planning and cultural expression we have become a model for capital cities once considered our superior.
We set ourselves a goal of becoming one of the world’s most liveable cities – we succeeded three times in under a decade.
This year we set ourselves a goal of becoming one of the world’s most sustainable cities – just four weeks ago, we were recognised as being in the top ten sustainable cities globally.
Growth of the city’s businesses and residents has brought life back to the city centre.
Melbourne is forecast to be Australia’s largest city within 20 years.
These are achievements that define a city and build a sense of pride among citizens.
They are achievements that require courage of conviction and a steady approach to leadership.
The Melbourne Living team has brought stability back to capital city governance.
We’ve maintained the focus on achieving outcomes for the community and business in Melbourne.
We’ve regained the trust of governments and voters.
One of my personal goals has been recognition of the vital role capital cities play in securing quality of life for the majority of Australians.
The City of Melbourne now enjoys strong partnerships not only with the State but Canberra as well.
Effective policy is something my team has never lost sight of.
We have achieved the vision and most of our policy commitments made at every election.
Among them are some of history’s defining moments:
• The Commonwealth Games will be remembered as one of the greatest and most seamless events ever staged in this city;
• Integration of Docklands has created one of the world’s most exciting waterfront domains;
• And multi million dollar investment in services and infrastructure has made the city of Melbourne a fantastic place to live, work and enjoy.
While busy achieving the vision we set ourselves, we’ve kept focus on the horizon.
The City has completed the most ambitious community consultation project ever undertaken in its history - Future Melbourne, which was endorsed by the Council last night.
Drawing on the collective intelligence and ambitions of 15,000 individuals, businesses and organisations, we now have a vision ‘for the people by the people’.
That vision is backed by a Government in such good financial shape: it has a AAA credit rating, is debt free and has strong cash reserves.
After integrating Docklands into the city, building CH2, Australia’s first 6-star green office building, contributing $43 million to the Convention Centre precinct, and staging the Commonwealth Games – all while delivering the lowest rate increases in Victoria in the past 8 years – we have a balance sheet that is the envy of governments Australia-wide.
I have called you here today to make this announcement.
After deep consideration, I have decided not to stand for re-election.
This decision has been one of the most difficult I have ever made.
I’ve given almost a quarter of my life to public service and, in return, it has given me many of the most rewarding experiences of my life.
You cannot work at 110% forever, and that’s what this job requires.
I am confident this is the right decision – it’s time to pass the baton.
The future Council inherits a solid foundation to drive the city forward.
And I still have keen interests I wish to pursue.
This city has a lot to gain from the connections it holds with the region.
I’m looking forward to the new possibilities presented by Australia’s increasing international engagement.
There are many people I must thank for the opportunities afforded me.
I wish to thank my Deputy, Gary Singer, former Deputy Lord Mayor Susan Riley and the Councillors on my team who have given so much to the city they represent.
Together, we ensured the people of Melbourne have always come first.
I want to thank City of Melbourne management and staff, particularly my Chief of Staff Kevin Louey.
To my supportive family, my children Nat, Alex, Eva and John, and my wife Wendy, what can I say? I love you all.
Finally, I want to thank the people of this great city.
Thank you for the faith, trust and encouragement you have given me.
Thank you for the privilege and opportunity.
Thank you Melbourne.’’
So calls it quits Exits as the high note begins to fade
John So, Melbourne's beleaguered Lord Mayor has called it a day.
John So has come under pressure lately for his lack of performance, poor financial management and policy vacuum.
John So faced with stiff competition has bowed out of the race rather then face a challenge. Accompanied by his wife and family John announced his decision to not stand at a press conference held today at the Town hall
John So has come under pressure lately for his lack of performance, poor financial management and policy vacuum.
John So faced with stiff competition has bowed out of the race rather then face a challenge. Accompanied by his wife and family John announced his decision to not stand at a press conference held today at the Town hall
So's time is up John bowes to pressure and competition
The Age has reported that John So will shortly hold a press conference in which it is expected that he will announce that he will not run for a third term as Melbourne's Lord Mayor
John So has come under strong criticism for his lack of performance, poor financial management and policy vacuum. Faced with growing opposition John has decided to quit while he is a head leaving more room for challengers and seekers to the key to the limo.
John So has come under strong criticism for his lack of performance, poor financial management and policy vacuum. Faced with growing opposition John has decided to quit while he is a head leaving more room for challengers and seekers to the key to the limo.
Tuesday, September 30, 2008
Switching Leagues Geelong versus Melbourne
With the 2008 Grand Final over and Hawthorn basking in glory whilst Geelong is left scarping with their tail between their legs next seasons talent scouts are planning and plotting who will run where in the November Municipal Elections.
Last week Jeff Kennett, Victorious president of the Hawthorn Football club, put to rest any suggestion that he was running for Melbourne's Lord Mayor leaving an open position for his wife Felicity Kennett to seek the Lord Mayor's gold chains and robes.
The Herald-sun add to the list of would be hopefuls by suggesting that Robert Doyle, former State opposition Leader, is also considering his position and possible nomination as the parties seek to renew the old.
There has even been a suggestion that former Councillor and Deputy Lord Mayor for one year Peter McMullin may seek to recontest the Lord Mayor's seat. Peter McMullin made an unsuccessful bid to win the keys to the Lord Mayor's Limo in 2001 and has since been hiding out in Geelong where he did a stint as Victoria's Second City Mayor.
If the rumors are true then Peter McMullin, having lost pre-selection for Corrangamite in 2007, may switch leagues again and return to the Melbourne City playing field .
Meanwhile J0hn So is yet to announce if he will or if he won’t be running for a third term. Pressure is on for John to stand aside and if he does decide to run he will not fare as well as he did back in 2004.
Bookmakers are not taking any bets until the next season players’ selection is known.
Last week Jeff Kennett, Victorious president of the Hawthorn Football club, put to rest any suggestion that he was running for Melbourne's Lord Mayor leaving an open position for his wife Felicity Kennett to seek the Lord Mayor's gold chains and robes.
The Herald-sun add to the list of would be hopefuls by suggesting that Robert Doyle, former State opposition Leader, is also considering his position and possible nomination as the parties seek to renew the old.
There has even been a suggestion that former Councillor and Deputy Lord Mayor for one year Peter McMullin may seek to recontest the Lord Mayor's seat. Peter McMullin made an unsuccessful bid to win the keys to the Lord Mayor's Limo in 2001 and has since been hiding out in Geelong where he did a stint as Victoria's Second City Mayor.
If the rumors are true then Peter McMullin, having lost pre-selection for Corrangamite in 2007, may switch leagues again and return to the Melbourne City playing field .
Meanwhile J0hn So is yet to announce if he will or if he won’t be running for a third term. Pressure is on for John to stand aside and if he does decide to run he will not fare as well as he did back in 2004.
Bookmakers are not taking any bets until the next season players’ selection is known.
Sunday, August 03, 2008
So will he or wont he? The Great Race for the Chains and Robes begins to take form
Michael Warner has a good historical summary of the race for the keys to the Lord Mayor's Limo in today's Sunday Herald Sun News paper . There has been a lot of speculation in the media this as the punters and would be Robe and Chains Hunters begin to mark their claims for the title of contenders.
John So
John So has yet to declare his hand but everyone expects he will be in in the race to become Melbourne Mascot Lord Mayor for a third term.
If John So will run he will find it a much more difficult challenge then he did last time around.
Most, if not all, of John's opponents will be seeking to ensure he does not win a third term. John So is unlikely to secure the level of support he received back in 2004 and his ploy of pleading to the electorate to give him their second preference may not deliver the same result as it did last time around. Odds are he will not secure a majority of the Council and will at best only win two of the seven Council seats on offer placing a So lead team in a not so strong position.
Jeff Kennett
Speculation has been rife that former Premier Jeff Kennett will put in a bid to be restored to public life. Jeff is not seen as a serious contender by insiders as he previously has toyed with the media and the idea of nominating for the City's number one but never followed through with the notion. It is unlikely he will do so again either. However he has John So and his team spitting dim sims at the prospect of facing such a political legend - a legend in his own mind.
Jeff Kennett really did not serve Melbourne well under his reign of terror, bad planning and municipal reform. In many ways Jeff Kennett is to blame for much of the mess and malice that the Council now faces. Jeff stripped the city of its asserts and reduced its size and influence to the point that the Council is perpetually dysfunctional.
Major projects under Jeff Kennett was a complete disaster that saw ill-considered and poor planning have a negative impact on Melbourne's future. (over 12 years on and we still are suffering the effects). The relocation of the Melbourne Museum to the Carlton Gardens and the development of Federation square being the classic tale of missed opportunities and poor long term strategic planning.
Eddie McGuire
The famous and talented Eddie McGuire gets a nomination but he also is not a serious player. Why would he when is doing fine what he is doing now and taking on the LM's position is not part of his long game play. Having to deal with the Council bureaucracy is such a daunting task. (But he would be welcomed if he nominated)
Bill Fowles
Young Bill Fowler, son of the Fowles auction house emporium, jumped the gun and announced his bid to seek ALP pre-selection and endorsement for the right to run as Lord Mayor. His proposed running mate is Kate Redwood, who could be his down fall. (Surely if he is serious he can and should find someone better to run with)
Kate Redwood, a former City Councillor and part time member of the ALP, has been a non-event careerist in the past. Redwood is more interested in securing lurks and perks, postings on various governmental boards to top up her meager salary and taking advantage of the numerous career advancement opportunities that being a City Councilor can offer then good governance. (Who can forget her $20,000 ten-day, first class accommodation, world tour junket she took paid for by Melbourne's ratepayers just before she lost office back in 2004).
The ALP has yet to decide if it will endorse any candidates and in the past it has been reluctant to do so.
A team with Redwood as a support act is unlikely to attract any serious attention and it is doubtful that the ALP will endorse candidates anyway. If it does then it is the Party that will decide who is to head-up and comprise an ALP endorsed team.
If Bill Fowles does run, chances are he will end up going the same way as Peter McMullin, former one-year-term Deputy Lord Mayor's efforts back in 2001.
Adam Bandt
The Greens nominated Adam Bandt. The Green's feel their on a roll having Richard Di Natale come within 2-3% of winning the State seat of Melbourne agianst embattled Local State ALP Member Bronwyn Pike in 2006 and Adam Bandt trying to bump-off Lindsay Tanner in 2007. Whilst the Greens will be expected to win a position on the Council it is unlikely they will have the chance to win the Lord Mayor's "Bicycle" seat. The Greens did well in Melbourne under David Risstrom but since his departure they have not really broken though the winning barrier. They will not have the support of the conservative liberal party supporters who gave them a snow flakes chance in a world of global warming back in 2006.
Kevin Chamberlain
The best contender to date is former Lord Mayor, Kevin Chamberlain. Kevin has the skill, knowledge and commitment to do the job and would be candidate worthy of consideration. Problem is Kevin is his own worst enemy at times. A former member of the ALP with strong community ties his brash style has alienated himself from those that would otherwise support him. Melbourne needs Kevin and there are many that believe Kevin would be best running as a Councillor and be assured of a seat at the table then to gamble once more by running for the top job.
In the background
The other player behind the scenes is the State Government of course. Their biggest mistake was letting the genie out of the bottle, thanks to Bob Cameron (former Local Government Minister who recommended, against sound advice, the adoption of a directly elected Lord Mayor).
The Lord Mayor's position has the potential to turn against its creator.
A politically astute Lord Mayor contender can be a thorn in the State Government's side, and if won by the opposition, is a position that could be the means and down fall of the State Government. (Remember Yeltsen) Whoever holds the position of Lord Mayor has the possibility to wage a war against the State and could prove a strong tactical position for an opposition to win the next battle scheduled for 2010. This is why there is so much interest in who may and who may not be running.
This most certainly would have the premier and his cabinet concerned if a hostile person was to win the robes and chains. One reason why one John may support the election of the other John.
Winners versus losers
In the midst of the media circus and speculation of who will be the main contenders, it is the City's residents and ratepayers that really lose out - as the focus of the public attention is on the personalities and not the policies or performance of the Council.
It is early days and the race is not yet in the starting blocks but the fun and games and media speculation has most certainly started.
The search for Melbourne's new Lord Mayor begins
Michael Warner, Herald Sun Newspaper
August 02, 2008
IN the heady days of the early 1960s Sir Maurice Arnold Nathan, lord mayor of Melbourne, occupied a post of genuine power.
By the time Sir Maurice had hung up his chains in 1963, the long-serving councillor had overseen the establishment of Tullamarine airport, Moomba and the Southern Cross Hotel, and headed the Melbourne Olympic Games organising committee.
He was the VFL chairman and a racing industry board member; he was responsible for widening CBD streets and formed the Victorian Promotion Committee (the original Victorian major events company) with premier Henry Bolte.
Forty-five years later about the best our Lord Mayor can claim is a name change for a city laneway to recognise rockers AC/DC.
But John Chun Sai So, Lord Mayor since 2001, has soared to superstardom anyway.
He's yet to decide whether to run for a historic third term on November 29, but either way his critics say his legacy will be a series of publicity stunts rather than reform, cultural or concrete.
So's popularity skyrocketed during the 2006 Commonwealth Games.
The So show peaked when the wealthy restaurateur was crowned the world's best mayor in an online poll.
But the anti-So forces, and there are plenty, say he's been nothing more than a Melbourne mascot, a yes man to premiers Bracks and Brumby, and is short on policy or plans for the CBD.
His defenders, and there are a few of those, too, say he's overseen a council that brought the city's laneways to life and delivered on minor projects such as CH2, the environmentally friendly building in Little Collins St.
Birrarung Marr and retail hubs at Melbourne Central, QV and the GPO emerged under his stewardship, even if they weren't his doing.
Others argue that state government reforms of the 1980s and 1990s rendered the lord mayor's position largely ceremonial.
But the emergence of former premier Jeff Kennett and Collingwood president Eddie McGuire as potential candidates - although McGuire has said he will not run - has raised questions over whether Town Hall and the Lord Mayor can still exert significant influence.
Liberal city councillor Peter Clarke says yes.
He says the only major power lost by the council in the 1980s was when control of planning projects bigger than 25,000sq m was handed to the State Government.
This saw major construction projects such as Crown casino, Melbourne Exhibition Centre, CityLink, Telstra Dome and Federation Square taken out of the council's hands.
"Outside of that, not much has really changed over all of those years. But the role of the lord mayor is played out differently, given the nature of the personality of the person who inhabits the seat," he says.
"John So has played the role of a marketing mascot for Melbourne. He's been all about what famous person you can stand next to. Everything is good news, there's no bad news.
"The criticism a lot of people would level against John is that he's a policy vacuum."
Clarke says a new lord mayor will have the power and legislative authority to shape several key issues
facing the city: traffic congestion, public transport, security, 2am lockouts, festivals, amenities, taxis, the drought and the health of parks and the Yarra River.
"That's why I think people got more excited about Jeff Kennett running than Eddie McGuire. As much as Eddie has a range of good ideas . . . it might be more marketing - and they're tired of that with John. They actually want some policy and some action," he says.
Formed in 1842, the Melbourne City Council predates the Parliament by nine years and played a vital role in forging the city.
Monash University historian Dr David Dunstan says the responsibility for planning, utilities and city trams was once the domain of powerful Town Hall figures such as Sir Maurice, Bernard Evans and Edward Leo Curtis.
"These were very successful, powerful and prestigious figures," Dr Dunstan said. "And the city council was a much bigger institution geographically."
Dr Dunstan believes a lord mayor that exerts authority could again emerge. "I don't think John So has been a good Lord Mayor. There are real issues facing the city to do with energy conservation, global warming, planning, transport and social equity, which he has not handled and I think Kennett would," he says.
". . . I don't think it would be a comedown for Jeff Kennett to be lord mayor of Melbourne. I think that's the level at which the contest should be played out.
"He'd get a lot of media play. He'd be in the papers every day and would be a de facto leader of the Opposition."
Dr Dunstan says No silence on CBD binge drinking is typical of his failures to capitalise on his powers.
"John So is no doubt a very nice and capable man, but he's been completely inarticulate on all these important issues. I think the mayor of the future needs to be much more engaged with urban issues and issues of planning, transport and well being."
But not everyone is critical.
City councillor David Wilson, who has worked closely with So, says he's a man of action. "I think he's been a very good leader. He has a passion for Melbourne and makes decisions on what is best for the city."
Brisbane's Lord Mayor, Campbell Newman, oversees a council that controls the city's public trans-port network and most major planning projects.
New York's and London's mayors also have far greater powers and multi-billion-dollar budgets.
London's flamboyant new mayor, Boris Johnson, is a case study for what might be achieved by a man such as Kennett.
Johnson, a supremo of conservative politics, has made a splash by banning alcohol on London's underground tube trains.
He's also leading a crackdown on street violence and weapons.
New York's Rudy Giuliani is another legendary mayor who famously enforced an apparently successful but controversial zero-tolerance policy on street crime.
Businessman Ron Walker, lord mayor in 1974, declined to comment on the council, but is believed to be bemused by the declining standard of mayoral candidates.
Former Lord Mayor Kevin Chamberlain (1983-84) says it will take 16 years, or four more terms, for Town Hall to recover from So.
"In the past, the City of Melbourne's strong financial position gave it significant independence and it was always a sore point for the state government," says Chamberlain, who is spokesman for city business and residential groups trying to reform the council structure and voting system.
". . . there is a need for a strong civic leader at the Town Hall who can advocate on behalf of the community and provide independent views on many of the important issues facing the city."
A candidate such as McGuire or Kennett would also have about $300 million a year, funded by rising rates and parking tickets, to spend.
Clarke says there is only a 50-50 chance Kennett would run.
"People are saying to me: 'If you speak to Jeffrey, encourage him do it.' Not because of any political basis, but because they see him as a person who does things."
John So
John So has yet to declare his hand but everyone expects he will be in in the race to become Melbourne Mascot Lord Mayor for a third term.
If John So will run he will find it a much more difficult challenge then he did last time around.
Most, if not all, of John's opponents will be seeking to ensure he does not win a third term. John So is unlikely to secure the level of support he received back in 2004 and his ploy of pleading to the electorate to give him their second preference may not deliver the same result as it did last time around. Odds are he will not secure a majority of the Council and will at best only win two of the seven Council seats on offer placing a So lead team in a not so strong position.
Jeff Kennett
Speculation has been rife that former Premier Jeff Kennett will put in a bid to be restored to public life. Jeff is not seen as a serious contender by insiders as he previously has toyed with the media and the idea of nominating for the City's number one but never followed through with the notion. It is unlikely he will do so again either. However he has John So and his team spitting dim sims at the prospect of facing such a political legend - a legend in his own mind.
Jeff Kennett really did not serve Melbourne well under his reign of terror, bad planning and municipal reform. In many ways Jeff Kennett is to blame for much of the mess and malice that the Council now faces. Jeff stripped the city of its asserts and reduced its size and influence to the point that the Council is perpetually dysfunctional.
Major projects under Jeff Kennett was a complete disaster that saw ill-considered and poor planning have a negative impact on Melbourne's future. (over 12 years on and we still are suffering the effects). The relocation of the Melbourne Museum to the Carlton Gardens and the development of Federation square being the classic tale of missed opportunities and poor long term strategic planning.
Eddie McGuire
The famous and talented Eddie McGuire gets a nomination but he also is not a serious player. Why would he when is doing fine what he is doing now and taking on the LM's position is not part of his long game play. Having to deal with the Council bureaucracy is such a daunting task. (But he would be welcomed if he nominated)
Bill Fowles
Young Bill Fowler, son of the Fowles auction house emporium, jumped the gun and announced his bid to seek ALP pre-selection and endorsement for the right to run as Lord Mayor. His proposed running mate is Kate Redwood, who could be his down fall. (Surely if he is serious he can and should find someone better to run with)
Kate Redwood, a former City Councillor and part time member of the ALP, has been a non-event careerist in the past. Redwood is more interested in securing lurks and perks, postings on various governmental boards to top up her meager salary and taking advantage of the numerous career advancement opportunities that being a City Councilor can offer then good governance. (Who can forget her $20,000 ten-day, first class accommodation, world tour junket she took paid for by Melbourne's ratepayers just before she lost office back in 2004).
The ALP has yet to decide if it will endorse any candidates and in the past it has been reluctant to do so.
A team with Redwood as a support act is unlikely to attract any serious attention and it is doubtful that the ALP will endorse candidates anyway. If it does then it is the Party that will decide who is to head-up and comprise an ALP endorsed team.
If Bill Fowles does run, chances are he will end up going the same way as Peter McMullin, former one-year-term Deputy Lord Mayor's efforts back in 2001.
Adam Bandt
The Greens nominated Adam Bandt. The Green's feel their on a roll having Richard Di Natale come within 2-3% of winning the State seat of Melbourne agianst embattled Local State ALP Member Bronwyn Pike in 2006 and Adam Bandt trying to bump-off Lindsay Tanner in 2007. Whilst the Greens will be expected to win a position on the Council it is unlikely they will have the chance to win the Lord Mayor's "Bicycle" seat. The Greens did well in Melbourne under David Risstrom but since his departure they have not really broken though the winning barrier. They will not have the support of the conservative liberal party supporters who gave them a snow flakes chance in a world of global warming back in 2006.
Kevin Chamberlain
The best contender to date is former Lord Mayor, Kevin Chamberlain. Kevin has the skill, knowledge and commitment to do the job and would be candidate worthy of consideration. Problem is Kevin is his own worst enemy at times. A former member of the ALP with strong community ties his brash style has alienated himself from those that would otherwise support him. Melbourne needs Kevin and there are many that believe Kevin would be best running as a Councillor and be assured of a seat at the table then to gamble once more by running for the top job.
In the background
The other player behind the scenes is the State Government of course. Their biggest mistake was letting the genie out of the bottle, thanks to Bob Cameron (former Local Government Minister who recommended, against sound advice, the adoption of a directly elected Lord Mayor).
The Lord Mayor's position has the potential to turn against its creator.
A politically astute Lord Mayor contender can be a thorn in the State Government's side, and if won by the opposition, is a position that could be the means and down fall of the State Government. (Remember Yeltsen) Whoever holds the position of Lord Mayor has the possibility to wage a war against the State and could prove a strong tactical position for an opposition to win the next battle scheduled for 2010. This is why there is so much interest in who may and who may not be running.
This most certainly would have the premier and his cabinet concerned if a hostile person was to win the robes and chains. One reason why one John may support the election of the other John.
Winners versus losers
In the midst of the media circus and speculation of who will be the main contenders, it is the City's residents and ratepayers that really lose out - as the focus of the public attention is on the personalities and not the policies or performance of the Council.
It is early days and the race is not yet in the starting blocks but the fun and games and media speculation has most certainly started.
The search for Melbourne's new Lord Mayor begins
Michael Warner, Herald Sun Newspaper
August 02, 2008
IN the heady days of the early 1960s Sir Maurice Arnold Nathan, lord mayor of Melbourne, occupied a post of genuine power.
By the time Sir Maurice had hung up his chains in 1963, the long-serving councillor had overseen the establishment of Tullamarine airport, Moomba and the Southern Cross Hotel, and headed the Melbourne Olympic Games organising committee.
He was the VFL chairman and a racing industry board member; he was responsible for widening CBD streets and formed the Victorian Promotion Committee (the original Victorian major events company) with premier Henry Bolte.
Forty-five years later about the best our Lord Mayor can claim is a name change for a city laneway to recognise rockers AC/DC.
But John Chun Sai So, Lord Mayor since 2001, has soared to superstardom anyway.
He's yet to decide whether to run for a historic third term on November 29, but either way his critics say his legacy will be a series of publicity stunts rather than reform, cultural or concrete.
So's popularity skyrocketed during the 2006 Commonwealth Games.
The So show peaked when the wealthy restaurateur was crowned the world's best mayor in an online poll.
But the anti-So forces, and there are plenty, say he's been nothing more than a Melbourne mascot, a yes man to premiers Bracks and Brumby, and is short on policy or plans for the CBD.
His defenders, and there are a few of those, too, say he's overseen a council that brought the city's laneways to life and delivered on minor projects such as CH2, the environmentally friendly building in Little Collins St.
Birrarung Marr and retail hubs at Melbourne Central, QV and the GPO emerged under his stewardship, even if they weren't his doing.
Others argue that state government reforms of the 1980s and 1990s rendered the lord mayor's position largely ceremonial.
But the emergence of former premier Jeff Kennett and Collingwood president Eddie McGuire as potential candidates - although McGuire has said he will not run - has raised questions over whether Town Hall and the Lord Mayor can still exert significant influence.
Liberal city councillor Peter Clarke says yes.
He says the only major power lost by the council in the 1980s was when control of planning projects bigger than 25,000sq m was handed to the State Government.
This saw major construction projects such as Crown casino, Melbourne Exhibition Centre, CityLink, Telstra Dome and Federation Square taken out of the council's hands.
"Outside of that, not much has really changed over all of those years. But the role of the lord mayor is played out differently, given the nature of the personality of the person who inhabits the seat," he says.
"John So has played the role of a marketing mascot for Melbourne. He's been all about what famous person you can stand next to. Everything is good news, there's no bad news.
"The criticism a lot of people would level against John is that he's a policy vacuum."
Clarke says a new lord mayor will have the power and legislative authority to shape several key issues
facing the city: traffic congestion, public transport, security, 2am lockouts, festivals, amenities, taxis, the drought and the health of parks and the Yarra River.
"That's why I think people got more excited about Jeff Kennett running than Eddie McGuire. As much as Eddie has a range of good ideas . . . it might be more marketing - and they're tired of that with John. They actually want some policy and some action," he says.
Formed in 1842, the Melbourne City Council predates the Parliament by nine years and played a vital role in forging the city.
Monash University historian Dr David Dunstan says the responsibility for planning, utilities and city trams was once the domain of powerful Town Hall figures such as Sir Maurice, Bernard Evans and Edward Leo Curtis.
"These were very successful, powerful and prestigious figures," Dr Dunstan said. "And the city council was a much bigger institution geographically."
Dr Dunstan believes a lord mayor that exerts authority could again emerge. "I don't think John So has been a good Lord Mayor. There are real issues facing the city to do with energy conservation, global warming, planning, transport and social equity, which he has not handled and I think Kennett would," he says.
". . . I don't think it would be a comedown for Jeff Kennett to be lord mayor of Melbourne. I think that's the level at which the contest should be played out.
"He'd get a lot of media play. He'd be in the papers every day and would be a de facto leader of the Opposition."
Dr Dunstan says No silence on CBD binge drinking is typical of his failures to capitalise on his powers.
"John So is no doubt a very nice and capable man, but he's been completely inarticulate on all these important issues. I think the mayor of the future needs to be much more engaged with urban issues and issues of planning, transport and well being."
But not everyone is critical.
City councillor David Wilson, who has worked closely with So, says he's a man of action. "I think he's been a very good leader. He has a passion for Melbourne and makes decisions on what is best for the city."
Brisbane's Lord Mayor, Campbell Newman, oversees a council that controls the city's public trans-port network and most major planning projects.
New York's and London's mayors also have far greater powers and multi-billion-dollar budgets.
London's flamboyant new mayor, Boris Johnson, is a case study for what might be achieved by a man such as Kennett.
Johnson, a supremo of conservative politics, has made a splash by banning alcohol on London's underground tube trains.
He's also leading a crackdown on street violence and weapons.
New York's Rudy Giuliani is another legendary mayor who famously enforced an apparently successful but controversial zero-tolerance policy on street crime.
Businessman Ron Walker, lord mayor in 1974, declined to comment on the council, but is believed to be bemused by the declining standard of mayoral candidates.
Former Lord Mayor Kevin Chamberlain (1983-84) says it will take 16 years, or four more terms, for Town Hall to recover from So.
"In the past, the City of Melbourne's strong financial position gave it significant independence and it was always a sore point for the state government," says Chamberlain, who is spokesman for city business and residential groups trying to reform the council structure and voting system.
". . . there is a need for a strong civic leader at the Town Hall who can advocate on behalf of the community and provide independent views on many of the important issues facing the city."
A candidate such as McGuire or Kennett would also have about $300 million a year, funded by rising rates and parking tickets, to spend.
Clarke says there is only a 50-50 chance Kennett would run.
"People are saying to me: 'If you speak to Jeffrey, encourage him do it.' Not because of any political basis, but because they see him as a person who does things."
Thursday, May 15, 2008
So Financially Challenged Melbourne goes into deficit for second year running
Melbourne City Council expected to go into deficit for a second year running as rates soar in order to pay the exhorbanent costs of the City Council .
Meanwhile John So, Melbourne Million Dollar a year Lord Mayor who hardly ever attends Council's finance and governance meetings, will take leave when the City Council brings down its budget that will see in the election of a new Council,
Property values in the City have soared in the ;last two years and as a result the amount of money paid in rates has increased substantially, providing a win-fall for the city. Melbourne City Council works on a NAV (Net Annual Value) rating system based on the valuation of rateable property in the City. As property values increase size does the amount of rates paid top the extravagant financially irresponsible city council.
On top of the rate increase that Council is also expected to gain a windfall in funding thought secondary incomes streams such as the Road Congestion tax and additional service fees that have crept in under John So's watch.
Asset rich income poor. The hardest hit in the rate increase will be pensioners and residents on a low income. Many ratepayers and residents of the city will soon find it too expensive to live within the City boundaries will be forced to sell up and move to a cheaper place to live outside the city.
Deficit budget is not good for Melbourne.
A deficit budget would see Melbourne's financial position worsen yet again as John So continues his high spend fest, minimal care over Melbourne's future.
Melbourne City Council and John So faces re-election in November and it is unclear if John So will run for a third term as Melbourne's Lord Mayor. John So has become Melbourne Most travelled lord Mayor has he and his staff continue to milk the City's treasury to funds John So's Chinese adventures. A deficit budget will add further financial pressure on the new City Council.
If the new Council does not come to terms with Melbourne high cost big spending administration it will soon face bankruptcy adding further to the financial pressure and possible future devaluation of property which will further diminish the City's financial stability.
Meanwhile John So, Melbourne Million Dollar a year Lord Mayor who hardly ever attends Council's finance and governance meetings, will take leave when the City Council brings down its budget that will see in the election of a new Council,
Property values in the City have soared in the ;last two years and as a result the amount of money paid in rates has increased substantially, providing a win-fall for the city. Melbourne City Council works on a NAV (Net Annual Value) rating system based on the valuation of rateable property in the City. As property values increase size does the amount of rates paid top the extravagant financially irresponsible city council.
On top of the rate increase that Council is also expected to gain a windfall in funding thought secondary incomes streams such as the Road Congestion tax and additional service fees that have crept in under John So's watch.
Asset rich income poor. The hardest hit in the rate increase will be pensioners and residents on a low income. Many ratepayers and residents of the city will soon find it too expensive to live within the City boundaries will be forced to sell up and move to a cheaper place to live outside the city.
Deficit budget is not good for Melbourne.
A deficit budget would see Melbourne's financial position worsen yet again as John So continues his high spend fest, minimal care over Melbourne's future.
Melbourne City Council and John So faces re-election in November and it is unclear if John So will run for a third term as Melbourne's Lord Mayor. John So has become Melbourne Most travelled lord Mayor has he and his staff continue to milk the City's treasury to funds John So's Chinese adventures. A deficit budget will add further financial pressure on the new City Council.
If the new Council does not come to terms with Melbourne high cost big spending administration it will soon face bankruptcy adding further to the financial pressure and possible future devaluation of property which will further diminish the City's financial stability.
Tuesday, May 13, 2008
Why John So is your bro The perils of a direct election
The Age has published an article proposing the question "Why is John So my Bro"?
IN it the writer makes some connection to London's new Lord Mayor and then goes on to expose some of the myths and weakness of Johns So's tenure.
This pop star image and brunt of a joke that John so well responds to is a by product of the Direct election system. A system that sees a populist politicians with no substance elected as Mayor of our capital city.
The question needs to be asked who supported the direct election model. The changes were brought in by Bob Cameron, the minister of Local government back in 2000. Bob Cameron did not last long as minister and was soon replaced by Candy Broad, a lack l;aster Minister. The review undertaken in 2000- was held in secret, submissions, unlike Municipal reviews undertaken today, where never published and the public had no opportunity to scrutinies or respond to the proposal for direct elections. Instead of being independent from the municipal process the review was made by the Department/Ministers office.
Last Year a number of Councillors recommend that the State Government City of Melbourne initiate a review of Melbourne representative model and that the City of Melbourne should be subjected to the same review process as all other Municipal Council in Victoria. Under the Local Government Act every municipality (except the City of Melbourne) is required to undertake a representation review every technical term of office. If these requirements applied to the City of Melbourne then a review should have been undertaken last year.
The proposal for a review was put forward and voted down by John So and his team 5-4 as John took the do nothing approach. The City Councillors whop initiate the idea of the review did nothing to further the issue and the State Government failed to take up the initiative.
Some Councillors are now trying to make a bit of noise about the need for a review before the next Municipal election due in November, but unless there is the political will there is a snow flake chance in hell that any meaningful review will take place.
Dick Wynne, former Council elected Lord Mayor and now Minister for Local Government has shied away from reviewing the monster that his predecessors created and allowed to exists. Dick more then any other Minister knows the short comings of the direct election model.
The So genie is out of its bottle and it may be hard if not impossible to put it back. The direct election model has failed to deliver good governance and more importantly the person elected Mayor is not held accountable as he/she is not elected and as such not accountable to the Council itself. Under the Council appointed system the City Councillors provided a day to day accountability. Under the direct election system the only accountability comes from the media and once every four years when the public focuses its attention on the would be star Lord Mayor and votes for who is the most likable.
The fact that the City finances are in worst shape then ever and that the design me a job city continues to milk the ratepayers for every cent and dollar possible has little to no bearing on the voters choice. many who live outside the city itself, the overseas property investor.
Melbourne Council most certainly needs review and the direct election model should cancelled. Council must be given more power and say to hold the Lord Mayor accountable.
In the end the failure of the City Council is a failure of the State Government to act.
One of the problems that inhibit the City Council is the restriction that the Load Mayor is also the Chairman of the Council, an oversight and left over from the days of a Council appointed Mayor.
The fact that John So has little skill and more often then not does not chair Council meetings is of concern.
If Dick Wynne and the State Governments are unwilling to subject the City of Melbourne to a proper and comprohensive open public review then the lest they should do is to separate the position of Lord Mayor and Chairman so that the Chairman can be appointed from and by the City Council. Such a move would provide the necessary day to day checks and balance required to restore good governance and financial management to the City.
IN it the writer makes some connection to London's new Lord Mayor and then goes on to expose some of the myths and weakness of Johns So's tenure.
This pop star image and brunt of a joke that John so well responds to is a by product of the Direct election system. A system that sees a populist politicians with no substance elected as Mayor of our capital city.
The question needs to be asked who supported the direct election model. The changes were brought in by Bob Cameron, the minister of Local government back in 2000. Bob Cameron did not last long as minister and was soon replaced by Candy Broad, a lack l;aster Minister. The review undertaken in 2000- was held in secret, submissions, unlike Municipal reviews undertaken today, where never published and the public had no opportunity to scrutinies or respond to the proposal for direct elections. Instead of being independent from the municipal process the review was made by the Department/Ministers office.
Last Year a number of Councillors recommend that the State Government City of Melbourne initiate a review of Melbourne representative model and that the City of Melbourne should be subjected to the same review process as all other Municipal Council in Victoria. Under the Local Government Act every municipality (except the City of Melbourne) is required to undertake a representation review every technical term of office. If these requirements applied to the City of Melbourne then a review should have been undertaken last year.
The proposal for a review was put forward and voted down by John So and his team 5-4 as John took the do nothing approach. The City Councillors whop initiate the idea of the review did nothing to further the issue and the State Government failed to take up the initiative.
Some Councillors are now trying to make a bit of noise about the need for a review before the next Municipal election due in November, but unless there is the political will there is a snow flake chance in hell that any meaningful review will take place.
Dick Wynne, former Council elected Lord Mayor and now Minister for Local Government has shied away from reviewing the monster that his predecessors created and allowed to exists. Dick more then any other Minister knows the short comings of the direct election model.
The So genie is out of its bottle and it may be hard if not impossible to put it back. The direct election model has failed to deliver good governance and more importantly the person elected Mayor is not held accountable as he/she is not elected and as such not accountable to the Council itself. Under the Council appointed system the City Councillors provided a day to day accountability. Under the direct election system the only accountability comes from the media and once every four years when the public focuses its attention on the would be star Lord Mayor and votes for who is the most likable.
The fact that the City finances are in worst shape then ever and that the design me a job city continues to milk the ratepayers for every cent and dollar possible has little to no bearing on the voters choice. many who live outside the city itself, the overseas property investor.
Melbourne Council most certainly needs review and the direct election model should cancelled. Council must be given more power and say to hold the Lord Mayor accountable.
In the end the failure of the City Council is a failure of the State Government to act.
One of the problems that inhibit the City Council is the restriction that the Load Mayor is also the Chairman of the Council, an oversight and left over from the days of a Council appointed Mayor.
The fact that John So has little skill and more often then not does not chair Council meetings is of concern.
If Dick Wynne and the State Governments are unwilling to subject the City of Melbourne to a proper and comprohensive open public review then the lest they should do is to separate the position of Lord Mayor and Chairman so that the Chairman can be appointed from and by the City Council. Such a move would provide the necessary day to day checks and balance required to restore good governance and financial management to the City.
Friday, March 28, 2008
City Council in denial John So avoids public review
A case of a plague on both your houses.
The Herald Sun has reported on the growing unrest amongst Melbourne's residents which comes as no surprise. BUT...
There is more to say about this issue and so little time. The fact is the City Council has only itself to blame and could have and should have done much more.
There was nothing stopping the City Councillors from calling on the State Government to subject the Council to a proper review. We have on many occasions raised this issue. It is not necessary to have John So blessing and the State Government should have and could have acted independently from the Council.
The fact that the City Council is not subjected to a regular review is an indictment against teh State Governments and a blot on Richard Wynne's leadership. Richard more the anyone knows Melbourne ad the issues involved. Instead of addressing these issues the State government opted for a head in the sand turn a blind eye approach.
The Councillors suppoorting the review should also share some of the blame. They had three years in which to raise these issues, they choose not to, leaving it to teh last minute and allowing John So to scuttle ay hope for a meaningful review.
The Council could have also opened up0 the committee structure and provided more local input and expertise. The Council has failed in all respects to deliver much needed reform, they must share responsibility equally with John So who continues to pander to the popular at the expense of responsible good governance.
Residents put city council on notice
Ian Royall, Herald Sun, March 28, 2008 12:00am
AN alliance of 10 city residents' groups has fired the first salvo in what it calls the battle for democracy in Melbourne.
The Coalition of Residents Associations has described the voting system for the Melbourne City Council as dysfunctional and undemocratic.
The group wants Local Government Minister Richard Wynne, who was mayor between 1990 and 1991, to intervene.
The push comes after the latest move for an electoral review was defeated by Lord Mayor John So Melbourne Living team at council on Tuesday.
The alliance wants:
POSTAL voting scrapped in favour of attendance voting;
REINTRODUCTION of the wards system;
REVIEW of the popular vote to elect the mayor. It claims the current method favours the richest candidate;
REVIEW of provisions allowing company directors and landlords to vote;
ALL candidates to have been on the electoral roll for at least two years before the election.
Former lord mayor Kevin Chamberlin said Melbourne was exempt from periodic reviews that applied to all other councils in Victoria.
"Melbourne could go for 50 years without a review under the current legislation."
Cr Fiona Snedden said the city needed a return to one vote one value principles.
She called on the lord mayor to act.
Cr So said he had had fruitful talks with the residents' groups.
"But six months before the election is not the appropriate time for a review," Cr So said.
Melbourne is growing by more than 9000 people because of the boundary changes that rope Docklands, North Melbourne and Kensington into the municipality.
The lord mayor said he had worked with the government over the boundary changes and was confident the current system was effective.
Mr Wynne's spokesman, Dan Ward, said: "The Government does not intend to change the council structure or the voting processes."
CORA member Jackie Watts said residents hoped transparency could be restored at Town Hall.
Mr Chamberlin said the case for a review was overwhelming.
"There is a lack of transparency and a lack of democracy," he said.
The Herald Sun has reported on the growing unrest amongst Melbourne's residents which comes as no surprise. BUT...
There is more to say about this issue and so little time. The fact is the City Council has only itself to blame and could have and should have done much more.
There was nothing stopping the City Councillors from calling on the State Government to subject the Council to a proper review. We have on many occasions raised this issue. It is not necessary to have John So blessing and the State Government should have and could have acted independently from the Council.
The fact that the City Council is not subjected to a regular review is an indictment against teh State Governments and a blot on Richard Wynne's leadership. Richard more the anyone knows Melbourne ad the issues involved. Instead of addressing these issues the State government opted for a head in the sand turn a blind eye approach.
The Councillors suppoorting the review should also share some of the blame. They had three years in which to raise these issues, they choose not to, leaving it to teh last minute and allowing John So to scuttle ay hope for a meaningful review.
The Council could have also opened up0 the committee structure and provided more local input and expertise. The Council has failed in all respects to deliver much needed reform, they must share responsibility equally with John So who continues to pander to the popular at the expense of responsible good governance.
Residents put city council on notice
Ian Royall, Herald Sun, March 28, 2008 12:00am
AN alliance of 10 city residents' groups has fired the first salvo in what it calls the battle for democracy in Melbourne.
The Coalition of Residents Associations has described the voting system for the Melbourne City Council as dysfunctional and undemocratic.
The group wants Local Government Minister Richard Wynne, who was mayor between 1990 and 1991, to intervene.
The push comes after the latest move for an electoral review was defeated by Lord Mayor John So Melbourne Living team at council on Tuesday.
The alliance wants:
POSTAL voting scrapped in favour of attendance voting;
REINTRODUCTION of the wards system;
REVIEW of the popular vote to elect the mayor. It claims the current method favours the richest candidate;
REVIEW of provisions allowing company directors and landlords to vote;
ALL candidates to have been on the electoral roll for at least two years before the election.
Former lord mayor Kevin Chamberlin said Melbourne was exempt from periodic reviews that applied to all other councils in Victoria.
"Melbourne could go for 50 years without a review under the current legislation."
Cr Fiona Snedden said the city needed a return to one vote one value principles.
She called on the lord mayor to act.
Cr So said he had had fruitful talks with the residents' groups.
"But six months before the election is not the appropriate time for a review," Cr So said.
Melbourne is growing by more than 9000 people because of the boundary changes that rope Docklands, North Melbourne and Kensington into the municipality.
The lord mayor said he had worked with the government over the boundary changes and was confident the current system was effective.
Mr Wynne's spokesman, Dan Ward, said: "The Government does not intend to change the council structure or the voting processes."
CORA member Jackie Watts said residents hoped transparency could be restored at Town Hall.
Mr Chamberlin said the case for a review was overwhelming.
"There is a lack of transparency and a lack of democracy," he said.
Friday, September 14, 2007
Power and the Council and the State Melbourne Car Free City - All except John So and his deputy who maintain a Council funded Limo
What about John and Singers Limo... Will they be kept in the garage on Melbourne Car Free city day? What about deliveries and emergency vehicles?
Power and the Council and the State
Who controls Melbourne?
Source: The Age: Clay Lucas
Melbourne City Council has been accused of lacking a long-term vision and being a pawn of the State Government and big business. Clay Lucas reports.
IN THE lead-up to the debate at Melbourne City Council last week over whether the city should stage a car-free day, one councillor told The Age they were happy to support the project.
"But that doesn’t mean it’ll happen," the councillor said. "Brumby will stomp on this thing by the end of the week."
It was a cynical reading of modern Victorian politics. But, as it turned out, not cynical enough.
It didn’t take Premier John Brumby to the end of the week to stomp on the idea of five young, enthusiastic and idealistic women. It took 12 hours.
Amid squeals of fury from motoring, business and trader groups, Brumby stepped in to crush the idea. "This is just short-term populism," he told ABC Radio. "It’s a stunt. It’s not going to change anything."
Alicia Webb, one of the environmentalists who put forward the car-free idea, was thrilled when the council agreed to give it in-principle support.
"The council (were) so willing to listen to the ideas of young people," says Webb.
But within hours, the group’s celebrations had turned into a media maelstrom. Webb says it was disappointing that the Premier rejected the plan without even hearing them out.
"The State Government criticised the concept before they even heard any of the details," she says.
That the project was blocked should not have come as a surprise in car-obsessed Melbourne.
Three months earlier, in April, Roads Minister Tim Pallas slapped down months of work by Melbourne City Council’s transport planners, who had proposed installing new "Copenhagen-style" bike lanes on St Kilda Road.
In one call from Pallas to 3AW’s Neil Mitchell, the plan was snuffed out, by a State Government desperate to not appear anti-car — despite all its sustainability spin.
For David Dunstan, from Monash University’s National Centre for Australian Studies, the car-free day and the bike lanes were more than just one-off proposals.
"They were about inspiring the public. They were both very imaginative and sensible ideas, and both were immediately stomped on by the State Government," he says.
Dunstan, who worked in the Cain government’s planning ministry in the 1980s, said a 1985 event he had helped organise — paving Swanston Street with grass, to capture city users’ imaginations over a plan to make the street car-free — would have been ridiculed by today’s State Government as loony.
"Anything original the council comes up with, Spring Street will immediately say no to," he says. "It is a sign of the profound contempt for local government from both sides of politics."
But it is also about something more obvious: power, and who controls central Melbourne. That was made blindingly obvious in January, after the council put forward an innovative idea to concentrate huge outdoor billboards in three key city sites, mimicking London’s Piccadilly Circus or New York City’s Times Square.
The council wanted to restrict the proliferation of "supersize" billboards, which they believed were overpowering the city’s heritage streets. But a word in the State Government’s ear from the powerful outdoor advertising lobby and the plan was overridden, subsumed in a statewide review of outdoor advertising laws by Planning Minister Justin Madden.
Rarely, if ever, is more than a whimper of protest heard from Lord Mayor John So when the State Government muscles in on council plans. "John will choose razzamatazz over usefulness every time," says Greens councillor Fraser Brindley, who brought the car-free plan to the council.
"He makes every decision in the frame of a photo shoot."
Last week So refused to back the car-free day, saying he supported it in spirit only. He did not publicly take on Pallas over the St Kilda Road bike lanes. Nor did he protest when the council’s advertising review was made redundant.
For Dunstan, the need to reform the City of Melbourne Act — last reviewed in 2001 — is obvious. "The reason why London Mayor Ken Livingstone has been able to achieve something is autonomy," says Dunstan. "Melbourne City Council has no effective power."
At a council committee meeting on Tuesday (that So did not attend), councillors voted to write to Local Government Minister Dick Wynne asking him to review the Act.
Ken Livingstone provides an excellent template for what can be achieved when a government is prepared to give real power to local government.
"Red Ken" was elected in 2000, after Tony Blair reinstated the Greater London Authority (Margaret Thatcher had abolished its predecessor, the Greater London Council, in the 1980s). Blair handed the authority executive powers over transport, emergency services and planning.
Seven years later, Livingstone remains mayor. And while his popularity is up for debate, his power is not.
Since 2000, Livingstone has introduced a congestion charge to keep cars out of London’s city centre, and used the revenue to improve London’s buses. He has fought hard against Gordon Brown’s privatisation of the London Underground, helped win London the 2012 Olympics and introduced a plan to put 50 per cent of affordable housing in all new projects.
Back in Melbourne, such revolutionary plans are seldom considered by the city council, partly because under a system set up by the Kennett government in the 1990s and continued under Labor, its voting system is gerrymandered to business.
Businesses registered within Melbourne City Council’s areas get two votes, while residents get just one vote.
THE pro-business candidates that are elected, such as John So, who was returned on a platform of keeping city rates low, are reluctant to rock the boat for the big end of town.
The situation is unlikely to change at next year’s council elections. So has already indicated he will run again. Such is the cost of running a lord mayoral campaign that several prospective candidates have already told The Age they will not even consider running against him.
In 2001, So spent at least $120,000 to get elected. In the most recent 2004 poll, insiders say he spent upwards of $200,000.
Critics of the current system of election at the city council complain that it stops candidates with big ideas running. One critic is John Young, a former Melbourne town clerk who spent 30 years working for the council finishing in 1994.
Since April, Melbourne City Council has been touting its Future Melbourne strategy as the source of new ideas for the city. The plan, a partnership between the council and Melbourne University, aims to come up with new ideas for the city, despite the council’s biggest idea — support for a proposed tollway tunnel linking the Eastern Freeway with the western suburbs — already being backed by both So and senior council bureaucrats.
But Young questions whether Future Melbourne is really the vision the city needs. New ideas for the city’s future should come from elected councillors, he says.
"Where is the vision coming from? I’m not sure it should be coming from a bunch of Parkville academics," says Young.
One Parkville academic, Melbourne University’s Paul Mees — who is not involved in the Future Melbourne project — argues that the most important part of coming up with ideas for the city is being a passionate advocate for them.
Instead, he says, the current council serves one purpose for the State Government: compliance. It never makes trouble, says Mees, and backs the State Government on big projects such as road tunnels, freeway extensions and new car parks.
"In all of the world’s cities where things have gone well, the push has come from the central city council.
That is never going to happen under the system we have now," says Mees.
But Chris James, a spokesman for the Victorian Employers Chamber of Commerce and Industry, says the council does not need reforms, and that the changes put in place in 2001 have worked well.
The stability of the council has given business stability and been a force for good in the city, he says. And it has vastly improved on the days of old, when constant sniping reduced its ability to function well.
But others believe the council’s high watermark as an agent for change was the 1980s; it saw the first woman lord mayor (Lecki Ord), the first avowed conservationist lord mayor (Trevor Huggard) and vibrant public debate about Melbourne’s future.
The council wrote the massively influential 1984 Strategy Plan, which laid out a blueprint to reinvigorate inner Melbourne. It worked hard to relax fire regulations and other red tape so that artists could work in the city and those keen to live in the CBD could do so.
Then, in 1993, the Kennett government gutted the council, undermining the likelihood of dynamic resident activists — such as Huggard — winning seats again.
For Dunstan, there is little chance the Brumby Government will reform the city council to give it real teeth.
"The Labor Party has walked away from City of Melbourne politics. It is part of its deal with the big end of town, and it has meant handing over the city to the people who profi t the most from it: the property managers. And they are troglodytes ... who do not believe in local democracy."
Other critics say it is crucial that planning powers are returned to the city council if it is to regain its importance in the public policy arena.
In 1980, Melbourne City Council was stripped of its planning powers on all applications bigger than 25,000 square metres. They automatically go to the State Government.
It is a stark comparison to Brisbane, where all the major parties run tickets and the 26-member council divides into government and opposition.
Councillors are paid the same as state backbenchers. The council in Brisbane (which covers a far larger area than Melbourne City Council) runs public transport. Additionally, the council has authority over large planning projects.
Dick Wynne is not keen on changing the City of Melbourne Act. "We have no plans to review (it)," the minister said through a spokesman. And this means keeping the status quo, and the likelihood that, should he run again, So will be re-elected in November 2008.
Privately, Wynne and the State Government are happy to have a Lord Mayor like So. The Liberal Party, too, is happy enough; it has no plan to reform the council should it win power in Victoria.
According to Dunstan, it is unsurprising both parties support the current system, or So. "He is exactly the person both sides of politics wants."
Power and the Council and the State
Who controls Melbourne?
Source: The Age: Clay Lucas
Melbourne City Council has been accused of lacking a long-term vision and being a pawn of the State Government and big business. Clay Lucas reports.
IN THE lead-up to the debate at Melbourne City Council last week over whether the city should stage a car-free day, one councillor told The Age they were happy to support the project.
"But that doesn’t mean it’ll happen," the councillor said. "Brumby will stomp on this thing by the end of the week."
It was a cynical reading of modern Victorian politics. But, as it turned out, not cynical enough.
It didn’t take Premier John Brumby to the end of the week to stomp on the idea of five young, enthusiastic and idealistic women. It took 12 hours.
Amid squeals of fury from motoring, business and trader groups, Brumby stepped in to crush the idea. "This is just short-term populism," he told ABC Radio. "It’s a stunt. It’s not going to change anything."
Alicia Webb, one of the environmentalists who put forward the car-free idea, was thrilled when the council agreed to give it in-principle support.
"The council (were) so willing to listen to the ideas of young people," says Webb.
But within hours, the group’s celebrations had turned into a media maelstrom. Webb says it was disappointing that the Premier rejected the plan without even hearing them out.
"The State Government criticised the concept before they even heard any of the details," she says.
That the project was blocked should not have come as a surprise in car-obsessed Melbourne.
Three months earlier, in April, Roads Minister Tim Pallas slapped down months of work by Melbourne City Council’s transport planners, who had proposed installing new "Copenhagen-style" bike lanes on St Kilda Road.
In one call from Pallas to 3AW’s Neil Mitchell, the plan was snuffed out, by a State Government desperate to not appear anti-car — despite all its sustainability spin.
For David Dunstan, from Monash University’s National Centre for Australian Studies, the car-free day and the bike lanes were more than just one-off proposals.
"They were about inspiring the public. They were both very imaginative and sensible ideas, and both were immediately stomped on by the State Government," he says.
Dunstan, who worked in the Cain government’s planning ministry in the 1980s, said a 1985 event he had helped organise — paving Swanston Street with grass, to capture city users’ imaginations over a plan to make the street car-free — would have been ridiculed by today’s State Government as loony.
"Anything original the council comes up with, Spring Street will immediately say no to," he says. "It is a sign of the profound contempt for local government from both sides of politics."
But it is also about something more obvious: power, and who controls central Melbourne. That was made blindingly obvious in January, after the council put forward an innovative idea to concentrate huge outdoor billboards in three key city sites, mimicking London’s Piccadilly Circus or New York City’s Times Square.
The council wanted to restrict the proliferation of "supersize" billboards, which they believed were overpowering the city’s heritage streets. But a word in the State Government’s ear from the powerful outdoor advertising lobby and the plan was overridden, subsumed in a statewide review of outdoor advertising laws by Planning Minister Justin Madden.
Rarely, if ever, is more than a whimper of protest heard from Lord Mayor John So when the State Government muscles in on council plans. "John will choose razzamatazz over usefulness every time," says Greens councillor Fraser Brindley, who brought the car-free plan to the council.
"He makes every decision in the frame of a photo shoot."
Last week So refused to back the car-free day, saying he supported it in spirit only. He did not publicly take on Pallas over the St Kilda Road bike lanes. Nor did he protest when the council’s advertising review was made redundant.
For Dunstan, the need to reform the City of Melbourne Act — last reviewed in 2001 — is obvious. "The reason why London Mayor Ken Livingstone has been able to achieve something is autonomy," says Dunstan. "Melbourne City Council has no effective power."
At a council committee meeting on Tuesday (that So did not attend), councillors voted to write to Local Government Minister Dick Wynne asking him to review the Act.
Ken Livingstone provides an excellent template for what can be achieved when a government is prepared to give real power to local government.
"Red Ken" was elected in 2000, after Tony Blair reinstated the Greater London Authority (Margaret Thatcher had abolished its predecessor, the Greater London Council, in the 1980s). Blair handed the authority executive powers over transport, emergency services and planning.
Seven years later, Livingstone remains mayor. And while his popularity is up for debate, his power is not.
Since 2000, Livingstone has introduced a congestion charge to keep cars out of London’s city centre, and used the revenue to improve London’s buses. He has fought hard against Gordon Brown’s privatisation of the London Underground, helped win London the 2012 Olympics and introduced a plan to put 50 per cent of affordable housing in all new projects.
Back in Melbourne, such revolutionary plans are seldom considered by the city council, partly because under a system set up by the Kennett government in the 1990s and continued under Labor, its voting system is gerrymandered to business.
Businesses registered within Melbourne City Council’s areas get two votes, while residents get just one vote.
THE pro-business candidates that are elected, such as John So, who was returned on a platform of keeping city rates low, are reluctant to rock the boat for the big end of town.
The situation is unlikely to change at next year’s council elections. So has already indicated he will run again. Such is the cost of running a lord mayoral campaign that several prospective candidates have already told The Age they will not even consider running against him.
In 2001, So spent at least $120,000 to get elected. In the most recent 2004 poll, insiders say he spent upwards of $200,000.
Critics of the current system of election at the city council complain that it stops candidates with big ideas running. One critic is John Young, a former Melbourne town clerk who spent 30 years working for the council finishing in 1994.
Since April, Melbourne City Council has been touting its Future Melbourne strategy as the source of new ideas for the city. The plan, a partnership between the council and Melbourne University, aims to come up with new ideas for the city, despite the council’s biggest idea — support for a proposed tollway tunnel linking the Eastern Freeway with the western suburbs — already being backed by both So and senior council bureaucrats.
But Young questions whether Future Melbourne is really the vision the city needs. New ideas for the city’s future should come from elected councillors, he says.
"Where is the vision coming from? I’m not sure it should be coming from a bunch of Parkville academics," says Young.
One Parkville academic, Melbourne University’s Paul Mees — who is not involved in the Future Melbourne project — argues that the most important part of coming up with ideas for the city is being a passionate advocate for them.
Instead, he says, the current council serves one purpose for the State Government: compliance. It never makes trouble, says Mees, and backs the State Government on big projects such as road tunnels, freeway extensions and new car parks.
"In all of the world’s cities where things have gone well, the push has come from the central city council.
That is never going to happen under the system we have now," says Mees.
But Chris James, a spokesman for the Victorian Employers Chamber of Commerce and Industry, says the council does not need reforms, and that the changes put in place in 2001 have worked well.
The stability of the council has given business stability and been a force for good in the city, he says. And it has vastly improved on the days of old, when constant sniping reduced its ability to function well.
But others believe the council’s high watermark as an agent for change was the 1980s; it saw the first woman lord mayor (Lecki Ord), the first avowed conservationist lord mayor (Trevor Huggard) and vibrant public debate about Melbourne’s future.
The council wrote the massively influential 1984 Strategy Plan, which laid out a blueprint to reinvigorate inner Melbourne. It worked hard to relax fire regulations and other red tape so that artists could work in the city and those keen to live in the CBD could do so.
Then, in 1993, the Kennett government gutted the council, undermining the likelihood of dynamic resident activists — such as Huggard — winning seats again.
For Dunstan, there is little chance the Brumby Government will reform the city council to give it real teeth.
"The Labor Party has walked away from City of Melbourne politics. It is part of its deal with the big end of town, and it has meant handing over the city to the people who profi t the most from it: the property managers. And they are troglodytes ... who do not believe in local democracy."
Other critics say it is crucial that planning powers are returned to the city council if it is to regain its importance in the public policy arena.
In 1980, Melbourne City Council was stripped of its planning powers on all applications bigger than 25,000 square metres. They automatically go to the State Government.
It is a stark comparison to Brisbane, where all the major parties run tickets and the 26-member council divides into government and opposition.
Councillors are paid the same as state backbenchers. The council in Brisbane (which covers a far larger area than Melbourne City Council) runs public transport. Additionally, the council has authority over large planning projects.
Dick Wynne is not keen on changing the City of Melbourne Act. "We have no plans to review (it)," the minister said through a spokesman. And this means keeping the status quo, and the likelihood that, should he run again, So will be re-elected in November 2008.
Privately, Wynne and the State Government are happy to have a Lord Mayor like So. The Liberal Party, too, is happy enough; it has no plan to reform the council should it win power in Victoria.
According to Dunstan, it is unsurprising both parties support the current system, or So. "He is exactly the person both sides of politics wants."
Thursday, August 16, 2007
So's Vision splendid undeclared Will he or wont he seek a third term
The glamour and public appeal of John So's populist Mayor has come under serious scrutiny in recent weeks with revelations that Our Worlds most popular Lord Mayor is unable to manage the business affairs of the council.
John So only survived a vote of confidence in his leadership earlier this year by use of his casting vote. The Ernst and Young report released in June espoused the truth and facts behind John So's leadership. If Melbourne continues to head in teh direction John So was heading the City of Melbourne would be bankrupt within 10 years.
Under John So there has been uncontrolled expansion in teh Councils bureaucracy with senior officers designing their own jobs to saute thicare life style. Staff cuts were inevitable but as we found out this week Senior management will not bear the brunt of the review as senior management close ranks to protect their life-style designer jobs.
The Trade Union movement last week joined a growing chorus of discontent in the Council's administration calling on the State Government to consider appointing administrators to oversee the administration of the City Council.
John So has failed to deliver where it counts most. his undeclared vision for Melbourne is undefined.
The Age today reports that John So will be seeking a third term as Melbourne Lord Mayor but as yet So is not prepared to rule himself in or out. he says he needs a third term to complete his vision for Melbourne. But what exactly is his vision.
Under john So we have seen unparalled expenditure and a serious decrease in teh councils working capital ratio.
Could his vision be a City bankrupt both financially and morally?
Mayor first declares he'll run, now not So sure
Clay Lucas August 16, 2007
JOHN So confirmed for the first time yesterday that he would seek a third term as Melbourne's Lord Mayor.
"I'm running," he told The Age — twice — after he mapped out his vision for Melbourne.
But two hours later, in classic So style, the Lord Mayor rang back to say he was no longer certain. He would, he said, only make an iron-clad commitment to run six months before Melbourne City Council's poll late next year.
The council, along with all of Victoria's 79 councils, will go to the polls on the final Saturday in November next year.
Cr So was last year voted the world's most popular mayor in an Internet poll. At the opening ceremony of the Commonwealth Games, he received more cheers than the Queen or Prime Minister John Howard.
However, many who work closely with the Lord Mayor find his lack of certainty about many key city issues — including his own future — infuriating.
While the Lord Mayor's popularity was a phenomenon in 2006, this year has not been as kind to him.
He has been repeatedly called into question over behind-the-scenes deals to promote himself, including personally guaranteeing a $100,000 grant to the Grand Prix Corporation for a Ferrari event in Lygon Street.
He also directed council officers to spend almost $500,000 extra on Christmas decorations, without consulting councillors.
Cr So will today meet both Opposition Leader Kevin Rudd and Mr Howard to seek federal funding for key city projects.
Yesterday he told The Age it was important he was re-elected next year so he could complete his vision for Melbourne.
He nominated key city projects as:
■ Decking over the Flinders Street rail yards to create a new pedestrian link to the Yarra.
■ Better connecting the western suburbs to the city by turning Footscray Road into another grand boulevard.
■ Making Melbourne one of the world's great cycling cities.
■ Reducing tram congestion in Swanston Street.
In June this year, Docklands came under the control of Melbourne City Council. Cr So said it was crucial the new suburb was completely integrated into the city grid.
John So only survived a vote of confidence in his leadership earlier this year by use of his casting vote. The Ernst and Young report released in June espoused the truth and facts behind John So's leadership. If Melbourne continues to head in teh direction John So was heading the City of Melbourne would be bankrupt within 10 years.
Under John So there has been uncontrolled expansion in teh Councils bureaucracy with senior officers designing their own jobs to saute thicare life style. Staff cuts were inevitable but as we found out this week Senior management will not bear the brunt of the review as senior management close ranks to protect their life-style designer jobs.
The Trade Union movement last week joined a growing chorus of discontent in the Council's administration calling on the State Government to consider appointing administrators to oversee the administration of the City Council.
John So has failed to deliver where it counts most. his undeclared vision for Melbourne is undefined.
The Age today reports that John So will be seeking a third term as Melbourne Lord Mayor but as yet So is not prepared to rule himself in or out. he says he needs a third term to complete his vision for Melbourne. But what exactly is his vision.
Under john So we have seen unparalled expenditure and a serious decrease in teh councils working capital ratio.
Could his vision be a City bankrupt both financially and morally?
Mayor first declares he'll run, now not So sure
Clay Lucas August 16, 2007
JOHN So confirmed for the first time yesterday that he would seek a third term as Melbourne's Lord Mayor.
"I'm running," he told The Age — twice — after he mapped out his vision for Melbourne.
But two hours later, in classic So style, the Lord Mayor rang back to say he was no longer certain. He would, he said, only make an iron-clad commitment to run six months before Melbourne City Council's poll late next year.
The council, along with all of Victoria's 79 councils, will go to the polls on the final Saturday in November next year.
Cr So was last year voted the world's most popular mayor in an Internet poll. At the opening ceremony of the Commonwealth Games, he received more cheers than the Queen or Prime Minister John Howard.
However, many who work closely with the Lord Mayor find his lack of certainty about many key city issues — including his own future — infuriating.
While the Lord Mayor's popularity was a phenomenon in 2006, this year has not been as kind to him.
He has been repeatedly called into question over behind-the-scenes deals to promote himself, including personally guaranteeing a $100,000 grant to the Grand Prix Corporation for a Ferrari event in Lygon Street.
He also directed council officers to spend almost $500,000 extra on Christmas decorations, without consulting councillors.
Cr So will today meet both Opposition Leader Kevin Rudd and Mr Howard to seek federal funding for key city projects.
Yesterday he told The Age it was important he was re-elected next year so he could complete his vision for Melbourne.
He nominated key city projects as:
■ Decking over the Flinders Street rail yards to create a new pedestrian link to the Yarra.
■ Better connecting the western suburbs to the city by turning Footscray Road into another grand boulevard.
■ Making Melbourne one of the world's great cycling cities.
■ Reducing tram congestion in Swanston Street.
In June this year, Docklands came under the control of Melbourne City Council. Cr So said it was crucial the new suburb was completely integrated into the city grid.
Tuesday, July 17, 2007
Lord Mayor Missing in Action
John So has not had a good month.
John first came under criticism following the release of the Ernst and Young efficiency report which found that John So was heading the Council towards bankruptcy and they seriously criticised his lack of good financial governance.
The report also unearthed another hidden layer of corruption in the Council's governance/administration which uses the BBC "Yes Minister" series as a "good governance guide in how to deceive the public (when is a cost not a cost - when it has not yet been acquitted - Good one Heather - lol how you managed to sell that to the Council auditors we never know but your sales pitch of deception did not win over your audience with that punch line).
Then came the motion of no-confidence in which John So avoided losing by using his casting vote. Both the Financial Review and the herald Sun have done a "expose on the Lord Mayor" which was not favourable.
Now the Age has weighed into the So hunt with this article by Clay Lucas.
So criticised for missing meetings
Clay Lucas, The Age, July 17, 2007
LORD Mayor John So has attended less than a third of Melbourne City Council meetings held in the past 18 months.
Cr So, who is on a salary of $110,000, has attended only 21 meetings out of a total of 76 held since January 2006. He attended 17 of the 18 full meetings of council, but only four committee meetings.
Fellow councillors said it was not good enough for the Lord Mayor to have missed so many council meetings.
"If councillors are not prepared to participate in democratic processes, then maybe they should step aside," said Cr Peter Clarke, a constant critic.
Cr Clarke and several others on the council believe that by operating this way Cr So dodges the responsibility for unpopular decisions — made initially at committee meetings and then ratified at full council meetings.
But the Lord Mayor argues that he does a more effective job by sending his deputy, Gary Singer, in his place to the council's committee meetings.
"I chair council meetings and my deputy represents the leadership team at committee meetings," Cr So said last night. His deputy, Cr Singer, attended 57 out of the 76 meetings held. "The job isn't just attending meetings," Cr Singer said.
The councillor with the worst attendance record was Catherine Ng, the chair of planning at the council, attending 42 meetings in the past 18 months.
John first came under criticism following the release of the Ernst and Young efficiency report which found that John So was heading the Council towards bankruptcy and they seriously criticised his lack of good financial governance.
The report also unearthed another hidden layer of corruption in the Council's governance/administration which uses the BBC "Yes Minister" series as a "good governance guide in how to deceive the public (when is a cost not a cost - when it has not yet been acquitted - Good one Heather - lol how you managed to sell that to the Council auditors we never know but your sales pitch of deception did not win over your audience with that punch line).
Then came the motion of no-confidence in which John So avoided losing by using his casting vote. Both the Financial Review and the herald Sun have done a "expose on the Lord Mayor" which was not favourable.
Now the Age has weighed into the So hunt with this article by Clay Lucas.
So criticised for missing meetings
Clay Lucas, The Age, July 17, 2007
LORD Mayor John So has attended less than a third of Melbourne City Council meetings held in the past 18 months.
Cr So, who is on a salary of $110,000, has attended only 21 meetings out of a total of 76 held since January 2006. He attended 17 of the 18 full meetings of council, but only four committee meetings.
Fellow councillors said it was not good enough for the Lord Mayor to have missed so many council meetings.
"If councillors are not prepared to participate in democratic processes, then maybe they should step aside," said Cr Peter Clarke, a constant critic.
Cr Clarke and several others on the council believe that by operating this way Cr So dodges the responsibility for unpopular decisions — made initially at committee meetings and then ratified at full council meetings.
But the Lord Mayor argues that he does a more effective job by sending his deputy, Gary Singer, in his place to the council's committee meetings.
"I chair council meetings and my deputy represents the leadership team at committee meetings," Cr So said last night. His deputy, Cr Singer, attended 57 out of the 76 meetings held. "The job isn't just attending meetings," Cr Singer said.
The councillor with the worst attendance record was Catherine Ng, the chair of planning at the council, attending 42 meetings in the past 18 months.
Friday, July 13, 2007
State Government MUST act to restore good governance and accountability in the City Council
Herald-Sun Newspaper Article on John So's Expenses - Public Comment
The directly elected model has failed to deliver accountability or good corporate governance.
Only last week former Lord Mayor, City Councillor and chairman of the the Council's Finances Committee, Kevin Chamberlain, called on the sate government to sack the City Council following revelations of a blow out in the cost of governance.
Under the provisions of the Local Government Act every municipality is subject to a representation review every second term of office. (That is except the City of Melbourne)
Dick Wynne, Minister for Local Government and former Lord Mayor of Melbourne, MUST subject the City Council to an open and public review in line with the municipal reviews undertaken by every other City Council.
Any review of the City Council must include a review of the representative model including the directly elected Lord Mayor and should also consider changes to Melbourne's external boundaries.
Melbourne City Council is due for such a review its last review (Which was not made public) was over two terms ago. Why is it The City Council exempt from this process?
The directly elected model has failed to deliver accountability or good corporate governance.
Only last week former Lord Mayor, City Councillor and chairman of the the Council's Finances Committee, Kevin Chamberlain, called on the sate government to sack the City Council following revelations of a blow out in the cost of governance.
Under the provisions of the Local Government Act every municipality is subject to a representation review every second term of office. (That is except the City of Melbourne)
Dick Wynne, Minister for Local Government and former Lord Mayor of Melbourne, MUST subject the City Council to an open and public review in line with the municipal reviews undertaken by every other City Council.
Any review of the City Council must include a review of the representative model including the directly elected Lord Mayor and should also consider changes to Melbourne's external boundaries.
Melbourne City Council is due for such a review its last review (Which was not made public) was over two terms ago. Why is it The City Council exempt from this process?
Million Dollar Entourage John So's cost of being popular
The Herald Sun has confirmed what we have been saying for the last six years.
John So has no idea of fiscal policies or how to govern. His Deputy Lord Mayor and political advisor is renowned for his financial activities and lack of transparency.
John So has embarked on a care-free spend fest.
So is prepared to tax motorist and Melbourne's business community with immunity.
The City Council is more interested in lurks and perks then holding So to account for his expenditure.
Only last month a Ernst and Young review, in which John So and the Council administration tried to keep secret, exposed the fact that the Council has been in the red for the last two years.
The report was condemning of the Council administration, alleging overt deception in the way in which the Council's finance and governance has been administered.
Designer-a-job is riff within the city council.
The Council had become a private club where senior officers designed themselves a job and their task was empire building. If there was something to their disliking they would employ someone to do the task that they should have done themselves.
Last year the Council also was exposed following a raid by the State Ombudsman. Alison Lyons, Council's legal advisor at the time, tried to thwart the Ombudsman from looking into the affairs of the Council. The Ombudsman found that the Council had acted corruptly and that the Council had extorted millions of dollars of funds from motorist illegally.
John So suffered a limp wrist blow last month when the City Council moved a motion of no-confidence in the Lord Mayor. The motion was lost on the casting vote of John So himself.
Last week former Lord Mayor, City Councillor and Finance Committee Chairperson Kevin Chamberlain called on the State Government to sack the City Council .
What is clear is that the City of Melbourne must undergo a full review in line with other municipalities reviews. Why is Melbourne exempt?
The Member for Melbourne, Bronwyn Pike, had promised during last years State Election camiagn to undertake a review of Melbourne's external boundaries. A promis that saved her seat in parliament.
It's time for the State Government to act on the promises made and to initiate a public review so that any recommendations and findings can be implemented prior to the 2008 council elections.
The proposed review should also reconsider teh merits of the direct election model of te Lord Mayor with further consideration given to creating a expanded rater City for Melbourne.
The State Government's "Do nothing - bury their head in the sand" approach can not continue. Dick Wynn, Minister for Local Government knows the issues well it is time he puts a plan for reform into action
Peter Mickelburough and Ian Royall
Herald Sun
July 13, 2007 12:00am
JOHN SO is the most expensive mayor Melbourne has had.
An Insight investigation has revealed it costs ratepayers up to $1 million a year to keep the mayoral office running.
Cr So, our first popularly elected Lord Mayor, is a cult figure to many Melburnians and last year became the first Australian named World Mayor.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What do you think? Have your say below.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
But his office, like other city council departments, has bloated under his leadership.
His trappings of office include seven personal support staff: a full-time chauffeur, a media minder, an on-call speechwriter, an executive assistant, two part-time Pas and a chief of staff.
Cr So's office and councillor expenses were off limits to a team from Ernst & Young called in to review council operations amid growing concerns they had become flabby and inefficient.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
John So: Power and passion
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The $300,000 review found the Town Hall management was top-heavy and disjointed and identified potential savings of at least $11.4 million.
Scores of staff are being axed across council departments to cut costs and balance the books.
But Cr So's office has been spared the knife. He will retain all his staff, whose annual wages bill alone is estimated to nudge $700,000.
Add to this Cr So's $120,000 annual allowance, expenses bill, and the cost of running his car and supplying his office.
"He certainly costs more than any lord mayor before him," said one observer.
"If you include the many thousands spent on promotions that have a John So appearance clause built into them, it would easily top $1 million a year."
The Lord Mayor yesterday defended the cost of his office and rebuffed his critics.
He said the resources of the mayoral office were for him and his deputy, Cr Gary Singer.
"I'm very conscious of the expenses, and the expenses have been reducing for a number of years," he said.
"All I can is that we are very conscious of the resources that are available to us."
Cr So also said he had called for the Ernst & Young report, saying that tough decisions had to be made as the previous review had been back in 1991.
The Insight investigation also revealed generous perks for the Lord Mayor's chief of staff and close friend Kevin Louey, who is on a package of $140,000.
Cr So said the employment details were a management issue and he was not involved in drawing up Mr Luey's contract.
"I believe he is the best person for the job," Cr So said.
Insight can also reveal that councillors and executives were warned of long-term financial woe two years before the Ernst & Young efficiency report.
Cr So defended the council's spending on marketing, promotions and sponsorships.
They were about stimulating business and bringing people in to the city, he said.
Just this week, councillors were asked to approve $720,000 in sports grants for city events linked to five major sporting events for the coming year. Instead, they signed off on $2.1 million for three years.
Every year until 2010, the council will hand out $100,000 for an international rugby match, $100,000 for the Formula One Grand Prix, $120,000 for the Australian Open tennis, $250,000 for AFL Grand Final week and $150,000 for the Spring Racing Carnival.
The funding was approved despite some earlier disquiet about the wisdom of the council giving cash to wealthy organisations such as the AFL and the Victorian Racing Club year after year.
Cr So said that everything he did was about delivering a balanced budget, stimulating business, and improving the quality of life in the municipality.
"It's my job as Lord Mayor to represent the people of Melbourne," he said.
John So has no idea of fiscal policies or how to govern. His Deputy Lord Mayor and political advisor is renowned for his financial activities and lack of transparency.
John So has embarked on a care-free spend fest.So is prepared to tax motorist and Melbourne's business community with immunity.
The City Council is more interested in lurks and perks then holding So to account for his expenditure.
Only last month a Ernst and Young review, in which John So and the Council administration tried to keep secret, exposed the fact that the Council has been in the red for the last two years.
The report was condemning of the Council administration, alleging overt deception in the way in which the Council's finance and governance has been administered.
Designer-a-job is riff within the city council.
The Council had become a private club where senior officers designed themselves a job and their task was empire building. If there was something to their disliking they would employ someone to do the task that they should have done themselves.
Last year the Council also was exposed following a raid by the State Ombudsman. Alison Lyons, Council's legal advisor at the time, tried to thwart the Ombudsman from looking into the affairs of the Council. The Ombudsman found that the Council had acted corruptly and that the Council had extorted millions of dollars of funds from motorist illegally.
John So suffered a limp wrist blow last month when the City Council moved a motion of no-confidence in the Lord Mayor. The motion was lost on the casting vote of John So himself.
Last week former Lord Mayor, City Councillor and Finance Committee Chairperson Kevin Chamberlain called on the State Government to sack the City Council .
What is clear is that the City of Melbourne must undergo a full review in line with other municipalities reviews. Why is Melbourne exempt?
The Member for Melbourne, Bronwyn Pike, had promised during last years State Election camiagn to undertake a review of Melbourne's external boundaries. A promis that saved her seat in parliament.
It's time for the State Government to act on the promises made and to initiate a public review so that any recommendations and findings can be implemented prior to the 2008 council elections.
The proposed review should also reconsider teh merits of the direct election model of te Lord Mayor with further consideration given to creating a expanded rater City for Melbourne.
The State Government's "Do nothing - bury their head in the sand" approach can not continue. Dick Wynn, Minister for Local Government knows the issues well it is time he puts a plan for reform into action
Peter Mickelburough and Ian Royall
Herald Sun
July 13, 2007 12:00am
JOHN SO is the most expensive mayor Melbourne has had.
An Insight investigation has revealed it costs ratepayers up to $1 million a year to keep the mayoral office running.
Cr So, our first popularly elected Lord Mayor, is a cult figure to many Melburnians and last year became the first Australian named World Mayor.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What do you think? Have your say below.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
But his office, like other city council departments, has bloated under his leadership.
His trappings of office include seven personal support staff: a full-time chauffeur, a media minder, an on-call speechwriter, an executive assistant, two part-time Pas and a chief of staff.
Cr So's office and councillor expenses were off limits to a team from Ernst & Young called in to review council operations amid growing concerns they had become flabby and inefficient.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
John So: Power and passion
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The $300,000 review found the Town Hall management was top-heavy and disjointed and identified potential savings of at least $11.4 million.
Scores of staff are being axed across council departments to cut costs and balance the books.
But Cr So's office has been spared the knife. He will retain all his staff, whose annual wages bill alone is estimated to nudge $700,000.
Add to this Cr So's $120,000 annual allowance, expenses bill, and the cost of running his car and supplying his office.
"He certainly costs more than any lord mayor before him," said one observer.
"If you include the many thousands spent on promotions that have a John So appearance clause built into them, it would easily top $1 million a year."
The Lord Mayor yesterday defended the cost of his office and rebuffed his critics.
He said the resources of the mayoral office were for him and his deputy, Cr Gary Singer.
"I'm very conscious of the expenses, and the expenses have been reducing for a number of years," he said.
"All I can is that we are very conscious of the resources that are available to us."
Cr So also said he had called for the Ernst & Young report, saying that tough decisions had to be made as the previous review had been back in 1991.
The Insight investigation also revealed generous perks for the Lord Mayor's chief of staff and close friend Kevin Louey, who is on a package of $140,000.
Cr So said the employment details were a management issue and he was not involved in drawing up Mr Luey's contract.
"I believe he is the best person for the job," Cr So said.
Insight can also reveal that councillors and executives were warned of long-term financial woe two years before the Ernst & Young efficiency report.
Cr So defended the council's spending on marketing, promotions and sponsorships.
They were about stimulating business and bringing people in to the city, he said.
Just this week, councillors were asked to approve $720,000 in sports grants for city events linked to five major sporting events for the coming year. Instead, they signed off on $2.1 million for three years.
Every year until 2010, the council will hand out $100,000 for an international rugby match, $100,000 for the Formula One Grand Prix, $120,000 for the Australian Open tennis, $250,000 for AFL Grand Final week and $150,000 for the Spring Racing Carnival.
The funding was approved despite some earlier disquiet about the wisdom of the council giving cash to wealthy organisations such as the AFL and the Victorian Racing Club year after year.
Cr So said that everything he did was about delivering a balanced budget, stimulating business, and improving the quality of life in the municipality.
"It's my job as Lord Mayor to represent the people of Melbourne," he said.
Saturday, June 02, 2007
Cock's Tender Up as Cull begins John So under pressure to make ends meet
Melbourne City Council begins to implement some of the recommendation contained in the $300,000 efficiency report as the Council begins to prune the bush and cut back on John So uncontrolled expenditure.
If anything John So has demonstrated that he has no idea of strategic investment. Wasted investments such as the Tourist Bus and lighting the Tan are just two examples of how out of touch with reality John So is from the day to day management of the Council.
John So last week faced a no-confidence motion amidst claims that he was a hands-off, removed from the coal-face, Lord Mayor.
This is one of the main problems identified with the populist direct election models. If Melbourne was sincere about good governance then it would scrape the hybrid direct election model, expand the city boundaries and the size of the elected City Council. The Lord Mayor, or at least the chairman of the Council, should be apointed from and by the elected Councillors.
There still is a long way to go and more cut backs can be expected. Still unknown is the extent of redundancy and breach of contract payouts the Council has to fork out. Again pointing to further stuff-ups and blow-outs in the City Council's Finance.
Finance Committee Chairperson Brian Shanahan has been the one that has had to take the flack and the task of doing all the hard work. Last week Shanahan voted no-confidence in John So as the Council's leader. Shanahan also voted against the Council's budget. Shanahan now needs to consider whether he will continue to prop up John So and remain his silent puppet or resign from being Chairman of the Council's the Finance Committee.
Senior executives to go in council cull
Clay Lucas, The Age May 30, 2007
Melbourne City Council could cut up to 100 staff in a second round of redundancies, a report reveals.
The council is expected to save $1.5 million by sacking 26 people, including several senior executives, in the first round of redundancies, announced earlier today.
It would save a further $5.7 million in redundancies in the second round, the report says.
In the first round of redundancies, the Council will sack several senior executives, including its controversial spin doctor.
The council is set to reveal 26 redundancies as part of its biggest shake-up in 14 years, theage.com.au understands, with up to 100 more to go in the coming months.
Two directors, 10 executives and 14 staff are among those expected to be made redundant today.
Corporate affairs director Hayden Cock, whose package is worth $220,000, is believed to be among those to be made redundant.
Chief executive David Pitchford notified each of the 26 staff this morning.
The move follows the completion last month of a $300,000 report by consultants Ernst & Young on how the council could cut costs.
The report found a massive blowout in labour costs at the council, huge problems with its parking officers, a blowout in executives at the council on more than $100,000, and an explosion of spending on marketing.
Lord Mayor John So, who did not return calls, will come under immense pressure now the confidential report is public.
The report's highly critical findings have found many problems at the council have emerged since 2002 - the year after Councillor So became Lord Mayor.
Other related coverage Links from the Age
Mayor survives attacks, but loses Dalai Lama fight
Big-spending mayor goes for broke
Rare revolt on budget as So confirms job cuts ahead
Budget blow-out a 'turn on' for media man So
If anything John So has demonstrated that he has no idea of strategic investment. Wasted investments such as the Tourist Bus and lighting the Tan are just two examples of how out of touch with reality John So is from the day to day management of the Council.
John So last week faced a no-confidence motion amidst claims that he was a hands-off, removed from the coal-face, Lord Mayor.
This is one of the main problems identified with the populist direct election models. If Melbourne was sincere about good governance then it would scrape the hybrid direct election model, expand the city boundaries and the size of the elected City Council. The Lord Mayor, or at least the chairman of the Council, should be apointed from and by the elected Councillors.
There still is a long way to go and more cut backs can be expected. Still unknown is the extent of redundancy and breach of contract payouts the Council has to fork out. Again pointing to further stuff-ups and blow-outs in the City Council's Finance.
Finance Committee Chairperson Brian Shanahan has been the one that has had to take the flack and the task of doing all the hard work. Last week Shanahan voted no-confidence in John So as the Council's leader. Shanahan also voted against the Council's budget. Shanahan now needs to consider whether he will continue to prop up John So and remain his silent puppet or resign from being Chairman of the Council's the Finance Committee.
Senior executives to go in council cull
Clay Lucas, The Age May 30, 2007
Melbourne City Council could cut up to 100 staff in a second round of redundancies, a report reveals.
The council is expected to save $1.5 million by sacking 26 people, including several senior executives, in the first round of redundancies, announced earlier today.
It would save a further $5.7 million in redundancies in the second round, the report says.
In the first round of redundancies, the Council will sack several senior executives, including its controversial spin doctor.
The council is set to reveal 26 redundancies as part of its biggest shake-up in 14 years, theage.com.au understands, with up to 100 more to go in the coming months.
Two directors, 10 executives and 14 staff are among those expected to be made redundant today.
Corporate affairs director Hayden Cock, whose package is worth $220,000, is believed to be among those to be made redundant.
Chief executive David Pitchford notified each of the 26 staff this morning.
The move follows the completion last month of a $300,000 report by consultants Ernst & Young on how the council could cut costs.
The report found a massive blowout in labour costs at the council, huge problems with its parking officers, a blowout in executives at the council on more than $100,000, and an explosion of spending on marketing.
Lord Mayor John So, who did not return calls, will come under immense pressure now the confidential report is public.
The report's highly critical findings have found many problems at the council have emerged since 2002 - the year after Councillor So became Lord Mayor.
Other related coverage Links from the Age
Mayor survives attacks, but loses Dalai Lama fight
Big-spending mayor goes for broke
Rare revolt on budget as So confirms job cuts ahead
Budget blow-out a 'turn on' for media man So
Wednesday, May 30, 2007
John So's Casting Karma Lord Mayor Survives No-Confidence Vote by His Own Casting Vote
John So Narrowly survived a a vote of no-confidence in his leadership by using his casting vote.
The vote of no-Confidence was moved following John's So's inability to properly manage the City of Melbourne fiscal budget and his decision to introduce a deficit for the 2007-8 financial year.
The Melbourne City Council, in what was seen as another blow to John So was that he was forced to invite the Dalai Lama to visit the Town Hall on his trip to Melbourne next month. The Dalai Lama has previously been welcomed at Town Hall during his past visits but ever since John So has been at the helm Town Hall, acting on the instructions of the Chinese Government have refused to extend a cordial invitation to the Tibetan spiritual leader. The Dalai Lama in 1992 had officated at a planting of a Budhi Tree in the Council designed 'Peace Garden' located in Carlton Gardens. The original tree was attacked by Vandals and the City Council under Rob Adams has not reinstated the tree.
Mayor survives attacks, but loses Dalai Lama fight
Clay Lucas The Age May 30, 2007
LORD Mayor John So has been forced to use his casting vote to stop a vote of no confidence in his leadership — the first such vote in his six years at the helm of Melbourne City Council.
And at a special meeting of the council last night, the Lord Mayor was forced to invite the Dalai Lama to visit the Town Hall on his trip to Melbourne next month.
Cr So, who is closely aligned to Melbourne's Chinese business community, came under fire two weeks ago for trying to ensure that no councillors met the Tibetan spiritual leader.
He came under renewed attack last night from four of the nine councillors, who confronted him on issues ranging from his failure to attend council committee meetings to accusations of economic mismanagement and claims that he ordered council spending without proper authority.
Cr So normally controls the numbers on the council, but with Deputy Lord Mayor Gary Singer in Europe, visiting the mayors of London and Milan, the Lord Mayor was forced to use his casting vote to defend himself from the attacks.
Shrugging off accusations from Cr Peter Clarke that his mayoral style was becoming reminiscent of former Queensland premier Sir Joh Bjelke-Petersen — because he "made decisions behind closed doors" — the Lord Mayor said: "Melbourne is doing very, very well."
Last night's meeting comes ahead of today's announcement of the biggest shake-up at the council in 14 years.
Consultants Ernst & Young last month completed a $300,000 report on how the council could cut costs.
Chief executive David Pitchford, who deemed the report highly confidential, will give his recommendations to the council's 1100 staff today.
The recommendations could could result in lay-offs at the council.
But the biggest news may have already been revealed inadvertently by the Lord Mayor.
Cr So last week appeared to break the confidentiality agreement surrounding the report when, under pressure from 3AW's Neil Mitchell, he said: "Yes, we get some staff redundants. Yes, of course."
Immediately after staff are told their fate today, the chief executive will hold talks with the Australian Services Union.
Other related coverage
Rare revolt on budget as So confirms job cuts ahead
Councillor to attend Dalai event, even if So doesn't
Budget blow-out a 'turn on' for media man So
As you spend, So shall you reap?
Rudd's Dalai Lama drama
The vote of no-Confidence was moved following John's So's inability to properly manage the City of Melbourne fiscal budget and his decision to introduce a deficit for the 2007-8 financial year.
The Melbourne City Council, in what was seen as another blow to John So was that he was forced to invite the Dalai Lama to visit the Town Hall on his trip to Melbourne next month. The Dalai Lama has previously been welcomed at Town Hall during his past visits but ever since John So has been at the helm Town Hall, acting on the instructions of the Chinese Government have refused to extend a cordial invitation to the Tibetan spiritual leader. The Dalai Lama in 1992 had officated at a planting of a Budhi Tree in the Council designed 'Peace Garden' located in Carlton Gardens. The original tree was attacked by Vandals and the City Council under Rob Adams has not reinstated the tree.
Mayor survives attacks, but loses Dalai Lama fight
Clay Lucas The Age May 30, 2007
LORD Mayor John So has been forced to use his casting vote to stop a vote of no confidence in his leadership — the first such vote in his six years at the helm of Melbourne City Council.
And at a special meeting of the council last night, the Lord Mayor was forced to invite the Dalai Lama to visit the Town Hall on his trip to Melbourne next month.
Cr So, who is closely aligned to Melbourne's Chinese business community, came under fire two weeks ago for trying to ensure that no councillors met the Tibetan spiritual leader.
He came under renewed attack last night from four of the nine councillors, who confronted him on issues ranging from his failure to attend council committee meetings to accusations of economic mismanagement and claims that he ordered council spending without proper authority.
Cr So normally controls the numbers on the council, but with Deputy Lord Mayor Gary Singer in Europe, visiting the mayors of London and Milan, the Lord Mayor was forced to use his casting vote to defend himself from the attacks.
Shrugging off accusations from Cr Peter Clarke that his mayoral style was becoming reminiscent of former Queensland premier Sir Joh Bjelke-Petersen — because he "made decisions behind closed doors" — the Lord Mayor said: "Melbourne is doing very, very well."
Last night's meeting comes ahead of today's announcement of the biggest shake-up at the council in 14 years.
Consultants Ernst & Young last month completed a $300,000 report on how the council could cut costs.
Chief executive David Pitchford, who deemed the report highly confidential, will give his recommendations to the council's 1100 staff today.
The recommendations could could result in lay-offs at the council.
But the biggest news may have already been revealed inadvertently by the Lord Mayor.
Cr So last week appeared to break the confidentiality agreement surrounding the report when, under pressure from 3AW's Neil Mitchell, he said: "Yes, we get some staff redundants. Yes, of course."
Immediately after staff are told their fate today, the chief executive will hold talks with the Australian Services Union.
Other related coverage
Rare revolt on budget as So confirms job cuts ahead
Councillor to attend Dalai event, even if So doesn't
Budget blow-out a 'turn on' for media man So
As you spend, So shall you reap?
Rudd's Dalai Lama drama
Thursday, May 24, 2007
Tuesday, May 22, 2007
Cutting the Fat Efficiency Report Identifies up to 10 Million Dollars in Governance Savings
Under John So's leadership expenditure in the City Council has sored with the City Council's working capital ratio declining to an all time low.
John So's financial management of the City Council is now faced with reality of having to pay for his spending spree.
The City Council at a cost of $300,000 has commissioned an efficiency report. the details of the report are secret and the public kept in the dark. it is understood that the report recommends a major reduction in staffing levels and reorganisation of the councils administration. The City Council has seen a blowout in staffing and administration costs since 1996.
The City Council now faces a 4 million dollar short fall in his recurrent budget and current levels of expenditure are unsustainable.
John So is has the reputation as being the man that an not say No has been the biggest spender in the Council's history. The council has got away with this high level of expenditure in the past due to significant increases in property values and inner city development which has generated substantial income for the city council. having access to more funds the city council went on a spending spree. Councillors and staff regularly travel overseas on junkets staying in five star accommodation with all expensive paid holidays.
It understood that the efficiency report was critical of Council's governance and financial reporting which the consultants claimed mislead the council as to the level of expenditure. one such example was the attainment by Ms Linda Weatherstation when asked why costs associated with former City Councillor Anthony Nicholson had not been reported. Ms Weatherson responded by saying that the costs had not been acquitted therefore had not been reported.
The efficiency report has identified savings of upto 10 million dollars in Council's current expenditure. It is time to cut the fat from the dim Sims - Question is John So up to it..
Melbourne council considers cuts for balanced Budget
Tuesday, 22 May 2007. 18:16 (AEST)
Source ABC
The Melbourne City Council is considering cuts in staff and services to balance its $354 million Budget.
The council needs an extra $4.2 million to pay for its budget initiatives.
An efficiency review is due to be completed next week.
The extra funds are likely to come from cuts to jobs and services or extra sponsorship and grant money.
Chief executive David Pitchford denies the council is spending money it does not have.
"The council preference is for a balanced Budget so the only way that we can balance the Budget is to work out how we will deliver those savings across the year," he said.
The city's parks and gardens, including new drought initiatives, have been allocated $6.4 million.
Almost $30 million will go towards promoting events and $22.2 million will be spent on new capital works.
Melbourne drivers will have to pay for an extra hour of parking in the city from July, with plans to increase parking times in the city from 6.30pm until 7.30pm released today.
The increase in restrictions is part of a number of changes to parking expected to provide council with an extra $1 million in revenue.
The council has already seen an increase in parking revenue.
Melbourne city drivers paid more than $70 million in parking fees and fines this financial year, an increase of $5 million on 2005-2006.
But a reduction in street parking places in the city is expected to cost the council more than $500,000.
Meanwhile, Melbourne's newest inner city suburb will cost Town Hall more than a $1 million over the next 12 months.
The urban development will be transferred to the council from Vic Urban in July, and it is the first time the financial impact of the inner city area has been taken into account by the council.
Residents and businesses moving to the new suburb are expected to pay a total of nearly $10 million in rates next financial year.
But the impact of depreciation on the $204 million development will cost council $3.5 million initially.
The council's three-year vision for the Docklands is expected to be released early next month.
John So's financial management of the City Council is now faced with reality of having to pay for his spending spree.
The City Council at a cost of $300,000 has commissioned an efficiency report. the details of the report are secret and the public kept in the dark. it is understood that the report recommends a major reduction in staffing levels and reorganisation of the councils administration. The City Council has seen a blowout in staffing and administration costs since 1996.
The City Council now faces a 4 million dollar short fall in his recurrent budget and current levels of expenditure are unsustainable.
John So is has the reputation as being the man that an not say No has been the biggest spender in the Council's history. The council has got away with this high level of expenditure in the past due to significant increases in property values and inner city development which has generated substantial income for the city council. having access to more funds the city council went on a spending spree. Councillors and staff regularly travel overseas on junkets staying in five star accommodation with all expensive paid holidays.
It understood that the efficiency report was critical of Council's governance and financial reporting which the consultants claimed mislead the council as to the level of expenditure. one such example was the attainment by Ms Linda Weatherstation when asked why costs associated with former City Councillor Anthony Nicholson had not been reported. Ms Weatherson responded by saying that the costs had not been acquitted therefore had not been reported.
The efficiency report has identified savings of upto 10 million dollars in Council's current expenditure. It is time to cut the fat from the dim Sims - Question is John So up to it..
Melbourne council considers cuts for balanced Budget
Tuesday, 22 May 2007. 18:16 (AEST)
Source ABC
The Melbourne City Council is considering cuts in staff and services to balance its $354 million Budget.
The council needs an extra $4.2 million to pay for its budget initiatives.
An efficiency review is due to be completed next week.
The extra funds are likely to come from cuts to jobs and services or extra sponsorship and grant money.
Chief executive David Pitchford denies the council is spending money it does not have.
"The council preference is for a balanced Budget so the only way that we can balance the Budget is to work out how we will deliver those savings across the year," he said.
The city's parks and gardens, including new drought initiatives, have been allocated $6.4 million.
Almost $30 million will go towards promoting events and $22.2 million will be spent on new capital works.
Melbourne drivers will have to pay for an extra hour of parking in the city from July, with plans to increase parking times in the city from 6.30pm until 7.30pm released today.
The increase in restrictions is part of a number of changes to parking expected to provide council with an extra $1 million in revenue.
The council has already seen an increase in parking revenue.
Melbourne city drivers paid more than $70 million in parking fees and fines this financial year, an increase of $5 million on 2005-2006.
But a reduction in street parking places in the city is expected to cost the council more than $500,000.
Meanwhile, Melbourne's newest inner city suburb will cost Town Hall more than a $1 million over the next 12 months.
The urban development will be transferred to the council from Vic Urban in July, and it is the first time the financial impact of the inner city area has been taken into account by the council.
Residents and businesses moving to the new suburb are expected to pay a total of nearly $10 million in rates next financial year.
But the impact of depreciation on the $204 million development will cost council $3.5 million initially.
The council's three-year vision for the Docklands is expected to be released early next month.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)