Dare to unite Kensington's campaign to reunite with Melbourne an issue in the November State election

Whilst Melbourne's Mascot Lord Mayor, John So, seeks to silence debate Kensington Residents, who claim 90% support for a review of the Melbourne City Council boundaries, continue the debate by placing the issue of city boundaries on the agenda for the November State Election.

John So's policy of avoidance and denial is not supported at home. If the ALP loose the seat of Melbourne John So can share some of the blame.

John So might be seen as the World's pin-up Lord Mayor but a leader he is not.

John lacks vision and ability to provide good governance or plan for Melbourne's future. He is Melbourne's most expensive Lord Mayor. Spending ratepayers money without any care or fiscal responsibility. John So and his self-indulgent band of City Councillors are Australia's most travelled and expensive council in history.

And guess what? Residents and traders are not happy, and it is not just Kensington. Carlton is also wanting a review of boundaries and if you ask Prahran and South Yarra they would prefer to leave Stonington and be united under a Greater Melbourne City Council. Somehow I do think they will support John's do nothing approach even if he is Melbourne's World's best mascot.


game on.

--- Copy of Kensignton's recent newsletter in the lead-up to next months State Election. Maybe John should rethink about nominating for State Parliament ---

On Wednesday 15 November we will hold a public meeting for all Kensington residents and traders. (7:00 to 9:30 pm, Holy Rosary School Hall)

All candidates for our local electorate of Melbourne will be invited.

We will ask candidates to respond to this question:

"What you will do for Kensington, if elected"

The Hon. Bronwyn Pike (Labor) is our current member. We expect Richard di Natale (Greens) to be a prominent challenger. We will have the complete list of candidates when nominations close in a few days time.

Candidates will be asked to address the number 1 issue:

* Kensington boundaries - What do they say about reuniting Kensington? (90% of residents want Kensington to be reunited under the City of Melbourne.)

We'll also ask them to address these issues:

* Health - What do they say about our community health centre buildings? (They are crumbling.)

* Traffic - What do they say about trucks in Macaulay Road? (There used to be a 24hr ban.)

* Public transport - What do they say about train services at South Kensington railway station? (Too few trains stop there.)


Then you will be able to ask questions.

If you want to make a difference regarding these issues, here are opportunities:

1. Come to the meeting! Please pencil in this date and start inviting your friends and neighbours.
2. If not currently a member, please join the Kensington Association now; if you are not up-to-date, please send your membership fees now.

Annual membership fees are $15 (family or couple, working), $10 (single, working) and $5
(single, not working). Please send cheques payable to "Kensington Association", PO Box 1208, Kensington 3031, to hand deliver cash or cheque please email me for details. You can also make a deposit by the internet: Internet: BSB 803-223, account 900084, to "Kensington Association".
3. Please volunteer for our letterboxing team. We will letterbox the whole of Kensington and need about 10 more people on the team. You commit to do a maximum of 2 hours.


Best regards,

Tony Dare
Membership Secretary and Treasurer
Kensington Association

John So for Melbourne Will So spring into Spring Street

John So on a high from being nominated as World Mayor for a day has been approached to see if he would run for the State seat of Melbourne.

Judging by his standing and expressions of approval John So could be a real threat to Bronwyn Pike and the Labor Party if John decided to nominate for the seat. An ex-resident of East Melbourne, John So has often toyed with the idea of running for State Parliament or even the Senate.

Whilst there is concern that if John was to run for the State Parliament pressure would be on for him to resign as Lord Mayor, although there is no legal basis that would require him give up the gold chain, limousine and town Hall office. Is is possible to hold down two jobs.

If John So was to resign the City of Melbourne would face the costs of a new election for Lord Mayor. A by-election for Johns seat in the limo would cost the City of Melbourne up to one million dollars. That's a lot to pay for one mans vanity. Hopefully the State Government will amend the legislation and provide for an alternative means of filling casual vacancies if and when they occur.

Game on..

The Polls are out of the starting gate Heraldsun publishes a poll today as Victoria's election enters the arena

The Heraldsun has published a poll today showing that the Liberal Party can expect a 6% swing. Wishful thinking or a flawed sample. A swing of this magnitude is only recorded at by-elections or when a government is seriously on the nose. I do not think we the Bracks government is resented to that extent. Overall they have provided responsible, if not lack lustre, performance. But never the less a swing of around 2-3% could be expected. The 2002 election result was extraordinarily good for Labor.

Newspoll paints a different picture

Newspoll Sep - Oct 2006
ALP (43%)
LIBERAL (35%)
NATIONAL (4%)
THE GREENS (7%)
OTHERS (11%)

Seats to watch include Prahran, Eltham and Melbourne (See below)

THE UPPER HOUSE

Earlier this year we did an analysis of the new upper house boundaries based on the 2004 senate vote.

Our analysis shows that the Liberal Party would most likely hold the balance of power in the upper house. The greens getting at best 2-3 seats.

If a credible vox pop poll was undertaken bade on the new upper house boundaries it would be possible to determine the outcome and the various thresholds following the publication of the registered above-the-line HTV cards.

When I first undertook analysis of reform of the Victorian Legislative Council we proposed dividing ten state into five electorates. (Two rural and three urban) Each electorate would return either 7 members (12.% quota) or 9 members (10% quota). This model was and is preferable to the current model that has been put in place.

THE GREENS

The Greens will run in every seat. Public funding means that they need to maximise the dollars as much as the vote. They have an outside chance of winning the lower-house seat of Melbourne.

It is easier to win a so called safe seat then one that is within 5%. The greens will need over 12.5% of the vote with the Liberal Party pegged back to below 25% and all preferences favouring the Greens. of course the ALP would also need to poll below 50%.

The same goes for Liberal held seats as we saw with the
election of Phil Cleary in Wills and the independents in Victoria.

Additional issues surrounding the upper house election system

The method of calculating the surplus value is based on the number of ballot papers and not the value of the vote seriously distorts the one-vote-one-value principle as major party votes increase in value at the expense of minor parties.

Further the system of segmentation which was first introduced to assist in a manual counting process also effects the outcome and needs to be reviewed.

With computer based technology the surplus vote should be transferred based on its value of the ballot paper being transferred and not the number of ballot papers.

There should only be one transaction per candidate. (Elimination of surplus distribution.)

As a result of my efforts to take the City of Melbourne to VCAT following the 1999 Council election and appeals to the Victorian State Parliament, the Victorian Electoral Commission has indicated that it will publish the detailed preference electronic data-file following the declaration of the poll.

Unfortunately the VEC will not be publishing the detailed preference data-file it via their web site. Why?

In the absence of the VEC acting responsibly I will endeavour to publish tis data and provide a the link on this site as soon as I can.

There is no reason why this information should not be publicly available during the count. With the counting process now being undertaken in cyberspace we need to look at new ways of scrutinising the ballot. This only way this can be done is via on-line publication of the preference data during the count. The availability of this data would facilitate open and transparent conduct of the ballot and provide a means for further independent analysis and scrutiny without it is virtually impossible to independently verify the validity of the election. More needs to be done to ensure that the process is fair and correct.

Silence of the lambs Do nothing John So casts vote to prevent debate and discussion

Melbourne City Council on Tuesday night under the "leadership of John So" voted down a motion to consider options for a possible expansion of Melbourne City Council's boundaries.

Cr Peter Clark had proposed that the City Council enter into dialog with its neighbouring municipalities about the possibility of a merger and creation of a Greater City of Melbourne. A move that would have seen the Kensington, Carlton and Prahran,South Yarra communities united under one Council.

So much for cummmunity particpation and debate.

The motion (which received 4 votes in favor and 4 votes against) was voted down by John So using his casting vote to silence debate.

John So continues to display a real lack of vision and wiliness to consider the hard issues. Instead he continues to spend-up big in an effort of self promotion. John So was recently voted Number one World Lord Mayor. The talk around the City Council by senior officers is that John went all out, a bit like being a beauty contestant, to try and win the acclaimed recognition.

"If only he had a real view or vision instead of wanting to be a mascot"

Full brownie points for Cr Shanahan who second the motion supported by Councillors Brindely and Snedden.

City power bid Herald Sun Article

The Heraldsun has published this OpEd piece. Whilst we can understand their concerns the fact is that an expanded Greater City of Melbourne would not be like the current City Council. With a broader constituency base it will be more accountable and hopefully more professional. It would most certainly not be able to getaway with the extent of corrupt practices that we have seen occur over the last 10 years.

The proposal to create a Greater City of Melbourne should not be seen as an "all in" or "all out" option. Whilst Prahran most defiantly is better suited to the City of Melbourne then it is attached to Stonington the same can not be said for the rest of Stonington. Port Philip is also well suited for merger as is the City of Yarra. Both have a common community of interest. The Kensington and Carlton communities should also be reunited in any proposal.

We welcome further consideration and debate of all proposals


City power bid

From: Herald-Sun
October 24, 2006

A PUSH by a Melbourne City councillor to form a Greater Melbourne Council by joining with other councils could widen the focus from a narrow, CBD-driven agenda.

But Melbourne City Council, with a track record of municipal bungling, must not dominate any expanded body. Neither should there be a moment's consideration of the suggestion that councillors in this super council should be paid more.

Melbourne councillor Peter Clarke wants to unite Maribyrnong, Melbourne, Port Phillip, Stonnington and Yarra councils, embracing 350,000 residents and the glittering prize of $500 million a year in rates.

Click here to read the full article on the
website

Melbourne Green's vision of indecisiveness Cr Fraser Brindley offers broad support but is unsure as to the process

Melbourne City Councillor Fraser Brindley indicates his support of a Greater Melbourne City Council but questions the process.

Please.. In all civility.. You have been in office for two years and you do not know where you stand on this issue. The idea of a Greater Melbourne should appeal to the Greens and in fact is already a part of the Greens electoral platform. The benefits to the environment are considerable, Fraser Brindley has done nothing to date to further the issue and when Cr Clarke seeks to put the issue on the agenda the only response we get is "Broadly supportive, but I'm not sure he's got the process exactly right"

Every idea of reform has to start somewhere it is not going to come out of thin air. The proposal by Cr Clarke is just the beginning, an effort to get the ball rolling and people talking. The motion should be supported and then put in place a process to further that goal. Any attempt at delay or any deferment would be seen as avoiding the question, silencing the debate in order to try and remove it from the political agenda in the lead-up to next months State election.


Full support for the creation of a Greater Melbourne and Cr Clarke's efforts.

It should be looked at sooner rather then later and ideally be in place before the 2008 Municipal elections. It should also be done in stages. I would most certainly support the merging together of the area covered by the state seats of Albert park, Melbourne, Prahran and Richmond. All these areas have a common community of interest. The City of Prahran is more suited to the City of Melbourne then Stonington. Likewise there is a need to re-unite the Carlton and Kensington communities that have been divided since the Kennett Government hived them off from the City boundaries.

In relation to perceived concerns about local representation this depends on the commitment of the elected council and new amalgamated administration to facilitate community representation and local input via local expert advisory committees.

You do not need to be an elected Councillor to have a say in local affairs.

In fact under an expanded model local communities could be better represented then they are today, Our elected councillors act like judges in a talent quest competition, they sit in judgement of everything under the sun irrespective of their expertise or understanding of the complexity of the issues involved. An expanded, more professional administration and representation would seek advice from expert advisory panels covering in greater detail issues such as the environment, planning, public transport, social services and the like. it would be the role of the elected Council to oversee the consultative process and governance of the new City.

This proposal is long overdue and I welcome further debate and consideration of the merits of the idea of creating a Greater City of Melbourne. If you did a vox pop amongst the residents of Prahran you will soon find that they would prefer to united under the City of Melbourne then to remain divided under Stonington. No doubts there will be a lot of ill-informed scare mongering. If you take time to work though the issues and act in good faith the basis of any objection to the proposal is unfounded and perceived problems and obstacles can and should be able to be resolved. It is right for Melbourne, it is right for Victoria and it is right for our future.

Push for a Greater Melbourne Melbourne's Heraldsun reports

The Melbourne Hearldsun has reported on Cr Clarke's option.

I am not sure if Melbourne should span as far away as Chadstone but most certainly should take in the area covered by the state seats of Prahran, Richmond, Melbourne and Albert Park.

The idea of creating a Greater City of Melbourne should be on the political agenda and all parties should back the proposal and help strengthen it by ensuring that any model put forward provides for effective governance and representation.

We are surprised that this motion has been put forward by Cr Clarke but it is the right move and one that deserves support and most certainly community debate. how much of it is times for the State election one can not be sure.

So what will it be.. yes or no?

It will be interesting to see who comes out and supports consideration of the idea and who is prepared to play political football and try and torpedo it before it is even discussed.

Push for a Greater Melbourne

Heraldsun

October 23, 2006 12:00am

PLANS for a new super-council stretching from Chadstone to Maribyrnong will go to Melbourne City Council this week.

The City of Greater Melbourne would house more than 350,000 residents and collect about $500 million a year in rates.
Melbourne councillor Peter Clarke, who is leading the amalgamation push, yesterday said better public transport was a major reason to unite Maribyrnong, Melbourne, Port Phillip, Stonnington and Yarra councils.

"In a co-ordinated way (we could) properly deal with the inner metropolitan transport and road network," Cr Clarke said.

"The main one has been public transport. When an entity has got larger, it's been able to organise public transport in a far more ordered and organised way.

"It's even the simple things like parking. You've got four different machines along St Kilda Rd (and) different rates."

Cr Clarke said Newcastle and Wollongong already had councils about the same size as that proposed for Melbourne.

He said an amalgamation would also lead to better aged care, child care and libraries.

"There is, understandably, a concern that you could possibly lose a more localised representation," Cr Clarke said.

But he pointed out that 41 councillors were on the five councils -- half the number of Victorian MPs.

Other councils could join the amalgamation push if they wanted to, Cr Clarke said.

Councillors in a Greater Melbourne council should be paid more to allow them to be more available to ratepayers, he said.

"I think you could be looking at models like Queensland where councillors become better rewarded and as a consequence become available more often during the day," Cr Clarke said.

Brisbane councillors worked full-time as councillors, he said.

Cr Clarke's motion will go before the City of Melbourne tomorrow.

If passed, the City of Melbourne will write to the heads of the other councils seeking formal support.

Residents would decide on the merger in a referendum held during the 2008 council elections.

But the amalgamations would need State Parliament approval.

Greater Melbourne on the move Councillor Peter Clarke demonstrates vision and committement to a proposed Greater Melbourne City Council

Melbourne City Councillor, Peter Clarke, has proposed a motion that the City of Melbourne enter into talks with its Neighbouring Municipalities to create a Greater City of Melbourne.

This is a policy that we have supported for some time and believe that the City of Melbourne along with the State Government should seriously consider supporting.

This will be a true test of the willingness of John So and the Melbourne City Council to investigate further the merits of a Greater Melbourne City Council. Question is John up to the Challenge? Does he have a real vision and commitment to Melbourne or is he just about his own backyard?

We also believe that the policy of direct election of the Lord Mayor should also be reviewed in particular issues related to the filling of casual vacancies. (We currently have a situation where if the Deputy Lord Mayor resigns Melbourne ratepayers will face a cost of up to one million dollars to hold a by-election. A burden on democracy that does not need to exist as there is an acceptable alternative but the State Government has not acted to make it available. more on this later)

Overall a Greater Melbourne is in Melbourne's best interest.

We congratulate Peter Clarke in taking this initiative and putting Melbourne's long term interest ahead of short-term limited thinking. We trust the elected `City Council will support this motion (Copy below) We will report on the voting within the Council chamber and hopefully provide some inside, behind the scene, politics.

It should be acknowledged and expected that a number of the Council administration will oppose the expansion and creation of a Greater City of Melbourne. (It will be interesting to see who within the administration gets behind the proposal and who will try and undermine it)

Those members of staff opposed to the creation of a Greater City of Melbourne are only interested in protecting their own personal interests and not that of Melbourne as a whole, They are concerned that if there was an amalgamation they may very well find themselves out of a job or that their job would be become more demanding as their responsibility and accountability would increase. They are the sort of staff Members that Melbourne is better off without.

Melbourne needs effective professional administrators, not those that are only interested in self serving cushy overpaid jobs with overseas travel and other perks and lurks. An expanded City of Melbourne would provide significant benefits and savings to all stake-holders through economies of scale and co-ordinated policy development and implementation.

The proposed creation of a Greater City of Melbourne will not only require support from other Municipalities but a genuine committment by State Government to deliver on the proposal.

Issues of local representation would be enhanced through an expanded expert/local advisory committee structure, professional representation and administration.

The fact that Peter Clarke, a senior member of the Liberal party, is proposing such a move hopefully will result in a bipartisan support.

The proposed Greater City of Melbourne should be fast tracked with all efforts made to put in place the new City boundaries and representative model by the 2008 Municipal elections.

Initial analysis shows that political control of an expanded City Council would not be dominated by any existing political party. The proposed expansion should not be seen as a party political power play but one that is in the best interest of Melbourne overall and something that is long overdue. The proposed new Greater City of Melbourne should take in the state seats of Melbourne, Richmond, Prahran and Albert Park.

We look forward to the review and future public debate on the merits and proposed structure of a new expanded Melbourne Municipal boundaries that will serve Melbourne in the 21st century and beyond.

See also previous posts on the Greater City of Melbourne

http://melbournecitycouncil.blogspot.com/search/label/Greater%20Melbourne

C O U N C I L Agenda Item 7.3

24 October 2006

NOTICE OF MOTION: CR CLARKE,

GREATER MELBOURNE COUNCIL

Motion

1. That:

1.1. the Chief Executive Officer writes to the cities of Maribyrnong, Port Phillip,

Stonnington and Yarra, seeking their support for:

1.1.1. agreement of their councils that a poll be taken of voters in their

municipalities in conjunction with the 2008 Council elections, to support

an amalgamation of these cities with the City of Melbourne to create a

City of Greater Melbourne; and

1.1.2. a committee be formed to discuss an appropriate electoral model to be put

to the individual municipalities at this poll;

1.2. the City of Melbourne agrees to seek support for the concept of a City of Greater

Melbourne by a merger with the abutting cities, to be determined by a poll at the

2008 elections.

Background

2. Some of the advantages of such a merger would reflect the capacity to implement with

greater effectiveness the eleven strategies in the Inner Melbourne Action Plan (see below)

as well as the more effective utilisation of the financial and management resources.

Strategy 1: Celebrate the unique and concentrated 19th Century heritage of Inner

Melbourne;

Strategy 2: Effectively link transport routes so the region is accessible throughout

by walking;

Strategy 3: Minimise the growing impact of traffic congestion;

Strategy 4: Increase public transport usage;

Strategy 5: Plan to accommodate 90,000 more dwellings by 2030;

Strategy 6: Support the distinct and diverse character of activity centres;

Strategy 7: Promote Inner Melbourne as an investment location;

Strategy 8: Facilitate the growing importance of Inner Melbourne as South-East

Australia's freight hub;

Strategy 9: Substantially improve the environmental performance of Inner

Melbourne;

Strategy 10: Complete the regional open space network;

2

Strategy 11: Promote Inner Melbourne as a tourism destination.

3. Such a concept should reflect continuation of a popularly elected Mayor and creation or

retention of Ward representation of the unique precincts throughout the merged cities.

Moved: Cr Clarke

Auditable accounts - The Campaign for accountability continues Correspondence sent to the City Council's Finance and Governance committee

The Lord Mayor and Councillors
City of Melbourne

Dear Councillors

In perpetration for the next update of Councillor's Travel Expenses due out next week.

I have noticed that the administration has altered information and also deleted some records from the previously published Travel register data.

Clearly there is a demonstratable need for the provision of record id's to be included in the register

Given the City Council's record of corruption and the fact that the Travel Register in its current form is not a fixed register but an "electronic whiteboard" it is rather easy for the administration to alter and remove records at will making it difficult for any effective audit of the published data.

I can only re-iterate my previous recommendations (Click here to view report) As the City Council has failed to properly consider these recommendations I request that the report below be referred to the Council's Audit Committee for further consideration by the City Council's auditors.

Yours faithfully

Anthony van der Craats

http://melbournecitycouncil.blogspot.com

Link to previous report

Happy Birthday John So turns 60 today

HAPPY BIRTHDAY JOHN... 60 You should be considering retirement at 60.

Seriously John Happy Birthday and may you get a new deputy soon.

Anthony..