LOWER HOUSE OF PARLIAMENT TO BE EXPANDED AND THEN

 

FROM THE EXAMINER: Tasmanian Parliament will grow by 10 members after the next state election. A bill to expand the House of Assembly from 25 members to 35 members passed the second reading in the Legislative Council on Thursday. ....................... Mersey independent MLC Mike Gaffney was the only member to oppose the bill. ....................... In his contribution, he said he could not support the bill as there needed to be more dialogue about parliament's functioning and other models. ....................... He said as the Liberals and Labor had eight members in the upper house in support of the bill, it would pass - no matter the issues raised. Mr Gaffney said a unicameral model of Parliament, like that in Queensland, appeared to have been ignored during consideration of the bill. ....................... He said this model could provide Tasmanian Parliament with plenty of ministerial options and members for committee work. ....................... Murchinson independent MLC Ruth Forrest said there had been an increase in the employment of more political advisers and money spent on consultants since the lower house was downsized almost 25 years ago. ....................... She said she was worried a 35-seat House of Assembly would lead to the election of more partisan backbenchers, adding there needed to be a much broader approach to parliamentary reform. ....................... "All this bill proposes is to address the body politic in a brand new suit," Ms Forrest said. ....................... "It's a worrying sign that we're prepared to accept a quick fix when far more is required." ....................... McIntyre independent MLC Tania Rattray said briefings on the bill had not reviewed the true cost of expansion nor the impact on the entire Parliament.

WELL YES, BUT COULD THIS ALSO MEAN SAVINGS 

IN RESPECT TO RATIONALISING LOCAL GOVT?

The notion that the Lower House should be expanded has been around for quite some time. Also, so has been the notion that IF it was to be expanded, them Local Govt. could be rationalised – indeed disbanded – in favour of a more Direct Deliberative Democracy model of governance.

In an expanded Lower House the notion of a dedicated MINISTRY OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY INFRASTRUCTURE could sensibly replace ALL Local Councils – the 29 of them – with:

•  Two, possibly three, COMMISSIONS operating under the auspices of The MINISTER; and

• A network of CATCHMENT FORUMS, with a rotational memberships, also auspiced by The MINISTER but operating under the agency of a COMMISSION; and

• With the COMMISSIONS MEMBERSHIP appointed by 'Governor and Executive Council' from nominees drawn from appropriately skilled and experienced personnel nominated and endorsed by the community and Commissioners; and

• With Council Administrations replaced by the COMMISSIONS' management networks OR standalone 'authorities' tasked to deliver services such as Resource Recovery, Infrastructure Maintenance, Building Supervision,  Public Health, etc.

The rationale for increasing the number of members in the Lower House of Parliament should flow on to the rationalisation of Local Govt in Tasmania. 

Clearly the Tasmanian Local Govt. Act 1993 is well past its use-by-date and is no longer fit for purpose. There is now an urgent need to better deploy scarce resources in order to overcome the multiple crises  'GOVERNANCE' is faced with in Tasmania.

If you want to be a change agent, 

you have to be ready to fail.

Robert Reich