City should be bigger – Kennett and Proust opposed by Doyle

Calls for a Greater City of Melbourne supported by Melbourne former CEO Elizabeth Proust and Jeff Kennett yet rejected by Robert Doyle

In an article published in the Age newspaper, that skims across the issue, both Elizabeth Proust and Jeff Kennett called for Melbourne to expand

Lord Mayor, Robert Doyle, desperate to hang on to his power base threatened violence by stating he would violently oppose the move.

Jeff Kennett former,Victorian Premier 1992 to 1999 who Robert Doyle as the State member for Malvern served under, would not be drawn into outlining boundaries said the City of Melbourne should be bigger.

Jeff Kennett was responsible for the reduction in the size of the City of Melbourne back in 1993 when the City lost a sizable part of its former boundaries to the North.  Mergers of other inner city coucnils took place leaving Melbourne a small shell of what it should be.

Prior to winning office Jeff Kennett opportunistically opposed moves by Labor’s Cain Government to merge Local Councils, only to embark on such a reform soon after taking office

There have been many pushes and recommendations for a Greater Melbourne which would put the City on par with cities such as London and Brisbane.

 
Melbourne should as a minimum take in the City of Port Philip and the former City of Prahran to the South of the Yarra with the possibility of including the City of Yarra to the North East.

Robert Doyle lives in the neigbouring City of Port Phillip and served as the Member of Malvern before losing the leadership of the State Parliamentary Liberal Party to Denis Napthine. He later resigned from State Parliament and stood for the City of Melbourne Lord Mayor’s Office in 2008 and again in 2012.  He has served since in a lack luster sugar coated local government position milking his status as Lord Mayor of the Borough of Melbourne socializing with the likes of Boris Johnston Mayor of the Greater City of London. Doyle, who campaigned on a short lived “No Junkets” policy is desperate to cling on to the perks of office, International travel and the Lord Mayors Limousine .

Call to slash Melbourne’s ‘inefficient’ councils

 Source The Age

Melbourne must slash its local councils from 31 to just one if it is to plan services and large-scale infrastructure effectively, a former CEO of the City of Melbourne and aide to premier Jeff Kennett says.

And Australia should cut its levels of government to just two – national and regional – rather than the current three tiers.

”Our federation and the sheer number and layers of organisations that involve themselves in decision making … slows us down,” said Elizabeth Proust delivering the Planning Institute’s annual Kemsley Oration, the industry’s key annual address, late last year.

Mr Kennett on Thursday did not support Ms Proust’s call for one Melbourne council, but backed a dramatic expansion of Melbourne City Council’s boundaries.

”I think it would be a natural reform for the future,” Mr Kennett said, although he said he ”would not stipulate … how many neighbouring councils [Melbourne] should absorb”. He said council amalgamations by his government in 1994 were ”the right thing to do”, and it would be worth reviewing the numbers of councils.

But Ms Proust said the amalgamations ”did not go far enough” as too many councils were ”too small to be effective or efficient”.

Ms Proust was chief executive of the City of Melbourne from 1990 to 1995, and then secretary of the Department of Premier and Cabinet.

During the tumultuous Kennett era, councils in Victoria were slashed from 210 to 79. ”That number is still too large,” she said. ”As is the number of 31 councils which cover Melbourne” because Melbourne’s size and scale demand city-wide vision and governance.

Melbourne will grow from 4.25 million people to 6.5 million by 2050, according to the Napthine government strategy.

Jude Munro, a former CEO of the Brisbane City Council, backed Ms Proust’s call. Brisbane is the country’s largest council, covering more than 1.1 million residents and running the city’s buses, ferries and its water infrastructure.

Ms Munro headed Moreland Council and the old St Kilda Council in Melbourne in the 1990s. She said creating a greater Melbourne council made sense, but said the mayor would become ”a real competitor to the Premier of Victoria”.

Lord mayor Robert Doyle said he would be ”violently opposed” to one greater Melbourne council, with the city’s CBD model working well. ”It works for Brisbane, but I don’t think it would work for a Sydney or Melbourne,” he said. ”You lose a bit if you try and be all things to all people.’

The Planning Institute’s Victorian president, Brett Davis, also cautioned that a merger of more councils was simplistic and might not address the city’s real governance challenges.

Doyle Cherry Picks Port Phillip

Melbourne City Lord Mayor, Robert Doyle, has called for a take over of Fisherman’s Bend precinct on the banks of the Yarra with the land being encompassed within the City of Melbourne’s Boundaries.

Doyle’s Cherry Picking proposal should be rejected.,

What is needed is a more comprehensive review of the inner City boundaries. There needs to be a discussion of a  full merger of the City of Port Phillip, the City of Yarra, and the former city of Prahran and the City of Melbourne.  All have a common community of interest.

The Kennett State Government’s previous reforms of Local Government was poorly considered and should have included an expanded City of Melbourne taking in the four inner City State seats of Albert Park, Richmond, Prahran and Melbourne would be a better option than the proposal put forward by Robert Doyle

A newly constituted Melbourne City Council should consists of 21 members  (3 wards by 7 Councillors or 7 wards by 3 Councillors)

Melbourne City Council – Holding them to account

Gallery

Welcome to the 2012 Melbourne City Council Election – Unaligned Independent Candidate’s web site Please vote one below-the-line Anthony van der Craats How To Vote Unfortunately due to unfair and unjust limitations voters wishing to support Independent Candidates MUST vote … Continue reading

City of Melbourne Representation Review 2012


SUBMISSION

Change that Counts
City of Melbourne Electoral Review

Commission Recommendation

I wish to express my support for the commission recommendation that the City Council be represented by a nine member city council elected as a whole in addition to the Lord Mayor and Deputy Lord Mayor but with qualification as outlined below:

1. Terms of Reference

The terms of reference of the commission were overtly limited and as such prevented the proper and concise review of the representative model,

1.2 Lord Mayor and Deputy Lord Mayor positions

The review should have included as part of its terms of reference method the direct election of election and representation of the Lord Mayor and the Deputy Lord Mayor. By failing to do so has brought the review into disrepute.

The dual election of both Lord Mayor and Deputy Lord Mayor on a preferential majority of vote distorts the proportionality of the representational model, effectively giving 50% of the electorate a ratio of three to one. This goes against the principle of one vote one value.

It is my firm position that the positions of Chairman and Deputy Chairman of the City Council should be appointed from and by the elected City Council as a whole and not by a general plebiscite. It is essential that the City Council maintains confidence and support in its chairman at all times. The elected Council should have the right to dismiss the Lord Mayor and Deputy Lord Mayor should they no longer maintain confidence of the Council. The City of Melbourne Act should be amended to provide clarity and a mechanism to address this issue. This could include a separation of responsibly of the Lord Mayor and the Chairman of the City Council.

Further, the legislative exclusion of candidates for the Lord Mayor and Deputy Lord Mayor positions from nominating and standing for the general Council position is discrimatory and severely limits the rights of candidates to stand for public office and for electors to choose those who they consider best to represent them. There is no justification that merits their exclusion from running for both positions. If need be the Government should consider increasing the nomination deposit for each position to discourage frivolous or tactical nominations.

1.3 Order of the Ballot

Analysis of the 2008 Lord Mayor ballot shows that the current Lord Mayor, Robert Doyle, was elected on the strength of the so called “Donkey vote” determined by the order of the ballot, with candidates at the top of the ballot having a distinct advantage of candidates that securer a lower position.

This issue can be addressed by adopting what is commonly referred to as “Robson Rotation” where the order of the ballot paper is rotted in such a way that no single candidate maintains a poll position in the order of the ballot.

1.4 Internals Ward

Whilst it is the past practice to establish local electorates on the false premise of a geographical boundary representing “community of interest” that fact is that community of interests transcend geographical boundaries.

Decisions of the Council are made as a whole and as such it is preferable that the Council is elected as and whole and not divided into geographical wards.

Local Wards

Concerns of non local-representation as made in a number of submission is misleading. Any perception of lack of representation is a reflection of the existing representatives and procedures of the City Council not the electoral system. An unsubdivided, multimember proportional representational model increases the representation of the Council. The single member model conversely diminishes and distorts the extent of representation.

If local wards are to be introduced then it is important that each ward returns the same number of elected representatives. To this extent, a nine member council would be best served if there were three wards each returning 3 elected councillors.

It is acknowledge that is often difficult to draw internal geographical boundaries in such as away so to maintain a balance of equal representation and number of constituents. For this reason it is recommended that the City of Melbourne not be subdivide into local wards

Alternative Option

An alternative to local wards is to implement a division of representation based on a voters mandate entitlement (Residents and non resident status) and electing Councillors according to their enrolment status. The review body should consider this as an alternative option.

1.5 External Boundaries

The review should have canvassed the need for a review of external boundaries. The City of Melbourne should be expanded to include the City of Yarra, Port Phillip and the former city of Prahran and the four state lower house seats of Albert Park, Melbourne, Richmond and Prahran taking into considerations of community of interest and economies of scale.

1.6 Method of voting

In considering any proposed representational model it is important that consideration is given to the method of voting and election.

Proportional Representation provides the best outcome of representation however the method of counting the vote as defined in the Local Government Act and Regulations distorts the proportionality and accuracy of the ballot.

The method of calculating the surplus transfer value and the distribution of preferences need to be reviewed. (See section below)

1.7 Above the Line voting

The method of “Above the line voting” used in the City of Melbourne election inflates the number of candidates who nominate with most groups nominating more candidates then can reasonably be expected to be elected. Further it allows for the predetermined allocation of preferences which in a local government context is not desirable although it is acknowledged that it does assist in the data-entry of ballot papers that record an “Above the line” vote. The “Above the line” voting system facilitates and encourages candidate groups to nominate as purely as tactical means of influencing the outcome of the ballot.

1.8 Method of fulfilling casual vacancies

The method of filling casual vacancies and count back currently implemented is seriously flawed. Over 6,000 voters were disenfranchised and their votes excluded as a result of the count back procedures used to fill the casual vacancy following the resignation of Councillor Clark. The value of Votes that remained on the table at the conclusion of the 2008 election were not taken into consideration. These votes should have been counted.

The current legislation provision only considers the ballots attributed to vacating candidate and in the process the candidate elected does not reflect the proportionality or intent of the electorate.

Analysis of the 2008 ballot indicates that the wrong person was elected to fill the casual vacancy as a result of this error.

This needs to be addressed if the community is to maintain confidence in the electoral process.

1.9 Integrity and scrutiny of the ballot

In 2008 THE Victorian Electoral Commissioner, Steve Tully, had interfered and undermined the independence of the returning officer. As a result the Returning Officer failed to adopt the provisions of the local Government Act that require the preliminary distribution of the ballot papers prior to the distribution of preferences. This severely limited the opportunity and quality of the scrutiny of the election. The preliminary distribution of preferences allows scrutineers to oversee the conduct of the election in an orderly sequential fashion, providing a means were a scrutineer can monitor the progression of the count. Whilst there is provision in the Act and Regulations for the Returning officer to vary the procedure used in an electronic count this does not necessitate or justify the refusal of the Returning officer to undertake a preliminary distribution prior to the data-entry and transcription of voter’s preference data.

Further more in the Chief Electoral Commissioner had compromised the integrity of the election by making allegations that were false and misleading in relation to the legitimate concerns expressed by members of the community as to the procedure of the counting of the ballot.

If confidence is to be maintained in the electoral process it is important that the returning office is independent from the direction or interference by the Chief Victorian electoral Commissioner. The Chief Victorian Electoral office has no legal to direct the returning officer in the fulfillment of their duties.

More information


City of Melbourne Representation Review 2012


SUBMISSION

Change that Counts
City of Melbourne Electoral Review

Commission Recommendation

I wish to express my support for the commission recommendation that the City Council be represented by a nine member city council elected as a whole in addition to the Lord Mayor and Deputy Lord Mayor but with qualification as outlined below:

1. Terms of Reference

The terms of reference of the commission were overtly limited and as such prevented the proper and concise review of the representative model,

1.2 Lord Mayor and Deputy Lord Mayor positions

The review should have included as part of its terms of reference method the direct election of election and representation of the Lord Mayor and the Deputy Lord Mayor. By failing to do so has brought the review into disrepute.

The dual election of both Lord Mayor and Deputy Lord Mayor on a preferential majority of vote distorts the proportionality of the representational model, effectively giving 50% of the electorate a ratio of three to one. This goes against the principle of one vote one value.

It is my firm position that the positions of Chairman and Deputy Chairman of the City Council should be appointed from and by the elected City Council as a whole and not by a general plebiscite. It is essential that the City Council maintains confidence and support in its chairman at all times. The elected Council should have the right to dismiss the Lord Mayor and Deputy Lord Mayor should they no longer maintain confidence of the Council. The City of Melbourne Act should be amended to provide clarity and a mechanism to address this issue. This could include a separation of responsibly of the Lord Mayor and the Chairman of the City Council.

Further, the legislative exclusion of candidates for the Lord Mayor and Deputy Lord Mayor positions from nominating and standing for the general Council position is discrimatory and severely limits the rights of candidates to stand for public office and for electors to choose those who they consider best to represent them. There is no justification that merits their exclusion from running for both positions. If need be the Government should consider increasing the nomination deposit for each position to discourage frivolous or tactical nominations.

1.3 Order of the Ballot

Analysis of the 2008 Lord Mayor ballot shows that the current Lord Mayor, Robert Doyle, was elected on the strength of the so called “Donkey vote” determined by the order of the ballot, with candidates at the top of the ballot having a distinct advantage of candidates that securer a lower position.

This issue can be addressed by adopting what is commonly referred to as “Robson Rotation” where the order of the ballot paper is rotted in such a way that no single candidate maintains a poll position in the order of the ballot.

1.4 Internals Ward

Whilst it is the past practice to establish local electorates on the false premise of a geographical boundary representing “community of interest” that fact is that community of interests transcend geographical boundaries.

Decisions of the Council are made as a whole and as such it is preferable that the Council is elected as and whole and not divided into geographical wards.

Local Wards

Concerns of non local-representation as made in a number of submission is misleading. Any perception of lack of representation is a reflection of the existing representatives and procedures of the City Council not the electoral system. An unsubdivided, multimember proportional representational model increases the representation of the Council. The single member model conversely diminishes and distorts the extent of representation.

If local wards are to be introduced then it is important that each ward returns the same number of elected representatives. To this extent, a nine member council would be best served if there were three wards each returning 3 elected councillors.

It is acknowledge that is often difficult to draw internal geographical boundaries in such as away so to maintain a balance of equal representation and number of constituents. For this reason it is recommended that the City of Melbourne not be subdivide into local wards

Alternative Option

An alternative to local wards is to implement a division of representation based on a voters mandate entitlement (Residents and non resident status) and electing Councillors according to their enrolment status. The review body should consider this as an alternative option.

1.5 External Boundaries

The review should have canvassed the need for a review of external boundaries. The City of Melbourne should be expanded to include the City of Yarra, Port Phillip and the former city of Prahran and the four state lower house seats of Albert Park, Melbourne, Richmond and Prahran taking into considerations of community of interest and economies of scale.

1.6 Method of voting

In considering any proposed representational model it is important that consideration is given to the method of voting and election.

Proportional Representation provides the best outcome of representation however the method of counting the vote as defined in the Local Government Act and Regulations distorts the proportionality and accuracy of the ballot.

The method of calculating the surplus transfer value and the distribution of preferences need to be reviewed. (See section below)

1.7 Above the Line voting

The method of “Above the line voting” used in the City of Melbourne election inflates the number of candidates who nominate with most groups nominating more candidates then can reasonably be expected to be elected. Further it allows for the predetermined allocation of preferences which in a local government context is not desirable although it is acknowledged that it does assist in the data-entry of ballot papers that record an “Above the line” vote. The “Above the line” voting system facilitates and encourages candidate groups to nominate as purely as tactical means of influencing the outcome of the ballot.

1.8 Method of fulfilling casual vacancies

The method of filling casual vacancies and count back currently implemented is seriously flawed. Over 6,000 voters were disenfranchised and their votes excluded as a result of the count back procedures used to fill the casual vacancy following the resignation of Councillor Clark. The value of Votes that remained on the table at the conclusion of the 2008 election were not taken into consideration. These votes should have been counted.

The current legislation provision only considers the ballots attributed to vacating candidate and in the process the candidate elected does not reflect the proportionality or intent of the electorate.

Analysis of the 2008 ballot indicates that the wrong person was elected to fill the casual vacancy as a result of this error.

This needs to be addressed if the community is to maintain confidence in the electoral process.

1.9 Integrity and scrutiny of the ballot

In 2008 THE Victorian Electoral Commissioner, Steve Tully, had interfered and undermined the independence of the returning officer. As a result the Returning Officer failed to adopt the provisions of the local Government Act that require the preliminary distribution of the ballot papers prior to the distribution of preferences. This severely limited the opportunity and quality of the scrutiny of the election. The preliminary distribution of preferences allows scrutineers to oversee the conduct of the election in an orderly sequential fashion, providing a means were a scrutineer can monitor the progression of the count. Whilst there is provision in the Act and Regulations for the Returning officer to vary the procedure used in an electronic count this does not necessitate or justify the refusal of the Returning officer to undertake a preliminary distribution prior to the data-entry and transcription of voter’s preference data.

Further more in the Chief Electoral Commissioner had compromised the integrity of the election by making allegations that were false and misleading in relation to the legitimate concerns expressed by members of the community as to the procedure of the counting of the ballot.

If confidence is to be maintained in the electoral process it is important that the returning office is independent from the direction or interference by the Chief Victorian electoral Commissioner. The Chief Victorian Electoral office has no legal to direct the returning officer in the fulfillment of their duties.

More information


City of Melbourne Representation Review 2012


SUBMISSION

Change that Counts
City of Melbourne Electoral Review

Commission Recommendation

I wish to express my support for the commission recommendation that the City Council be represented by a nine member city council elected as a whole in addition to the Lord Mayor and Deputy Lord Mayor but with qualification as outlined below:

1. Terms of Reference

The terms of reference of the commission were overtly limited and as such prevented the proper and concise review of the representative model,

1.2 Lord Mayor and Deputy Lord Mayor positions

The review should have included as part of its terms of reference method the direct election of election and representation of the Lord Mayor and the Deputy Lord Mayor. By failing to do so has brought the review into disrepute.

The dual election of both Lord Mayor and Deputy Lord Mayor on a preferential majority of vote distorts the proportionality of the representational model, effectively giving 50% of the electorate a ratio of three to one. This goes against the principle of one vote one value.

It is my firm position that the positions of Chairman and Deputy Chairman of the City Council should be appointed from and by the elected City Council as a whole and not by a general plebiscite. It is essential that the City Council maintains confidence and support in its chairman at all times. The elected Council should have the right to dismiss the Lord Mayor and Deputy Lord Mayor should they no longer maintain confidence of the Council. The City of Melbourne Act should be amended to provide clarity and a mechanism to address this issue. This could include a separation of responsibly of the Lord Mayor and the Chairman of the City Council.

Further, the legislative exclusion of candidates for the Lord Mayor and Deputy Lord Mayor positions from nominating and standing for the general Council position is discrimatory and severely limits the rights of candidates to stand for public office and for electors to choose those who they consider best to represent them. There is no justification that merits their exclusion from running for both positions. If need be the Government should consider increasing the nomination deposit for each position to discourage frivolous or tactical nominations.

1.3 Order of the Ballot

Analysis of the 2008 Lord Mayor ballot shows that the current Lord Mayor, Robert Doyle, was elected on the strength of the so called “Donkey vote” determined by the order of the ballot, with candidates at the top of the ballot having a distinct advantage of candidates that securer a lower position.

This issue can be addressed by adopting what is commonly referred to as “Robson Rotation” where the order of the ballot paper is rotted in such a way that no single candidate maintains a poll position in the order of the ballot.

1.4 Internals Ward

Whilst it is the past practice to establish local electorates on the false premise of a geographical boundary representing “community of interest” that fact is that community of interests transcend geographical boundaries.

Decisions of the Council are made as a whole and as such it is preferable that the Council is elected as and whole and not divided into geographical wards.

Local Wards

Concerns of non local-representation as made in a number of submission is misleading. Any perception of lack of representation is a reflection of the existing representatives and procedures of the City Council not the electoral system. An unsubdivided, multimember proportional representational model increases the representation of the Council. The single member model conversely diminishes and distorts the extent of representation.

If local wards are to be introduced then it is important that each ward returns the same number of elected representatives. To this extent, a nine member council would be best served if there were three wards each returning 3 elected councillors.

It is acknowledge that is often difficult to draw internal geographical boundaries in such as away so to maintain a balance of equal representation and number of constituents. For this reason it is recommended that the City of Melbourne not be subdivide into local wards

Alternative Option

An alternative to local wards is to implement a division of representation based on a voters mandate entitlement (Residents and non resident status) and electing Councillors according to their enrolment status. The review body should consider this as an alternative option.

1.5 External Boundaries

The review should have canvassed the need for a review of external boundaries. The City of Melbourne should be expanded to include the City of Yarra, Port Phillip and the former city of Prahran and the four state lower house seats of Albert Park, Melbourne, Richmond and Prahran taking into considerations of community of interest and economies of scale.

1.6 Method of voting

In considering any proposed representational model it is important that consideration is given to the method of voting and election.

Proportional Representation provides the best outcome of representation however the method of counting the vote as defined in the Local Government Act and Regulations distorts the proportionality and accuracy of the ballot.

The method of calculating the surplus transfer value and the distribution of preferences need to be reviewed. (See section below)

1.7 Above the Line voting

The method of “Above the line voting” used in the City of Melbourne election inflates the number of candidates who nominate with most groups nominating more candidates then can reasonably be expected to be elected. Further it allows for the predetermined allocation of preferences which in a local government context is not desirable although it is acknowledged that it does assist in the data-entry of ballot papers that record an “Above the line” vote. The “Above the line” voting system facilitates and encourages candidate groups to nominate as purely as tactical means of influencing the outcome of the ballot.

1.8 Method of fulfilling casual vacancies

The method of filling casual vacancies and count back currently implemented is seriously flawed. Over 6,000 voters were disenfranchised and their votes excluded as a result of the count back procedures used to fill the casual vacancy following the resignation of Councillor Clark. The value of Votes that remained on the table at the conclusion of the 2008 election were not taken into consideration. These votes should have been counted.

The current legislation provision only considers the ballots attributed to vacating candidate and in the process the candidate elected does not reflect the proportionality or intent of the electorate.

Analysis of the 2008 ballot indicates that the wrong person was elected to fill the casual vacancy as a result of this error.

This needs to be addressed if the community is to maintain confidence in the electoral process.

1.9 Integrity and scrutiny of the ballot

In 2008 THE Victorian Electoral Commissioner, Steve Tully, had interfered and undermined the independence of the returning officer. As a result the Returning Officer failed to adopt the provisions of the local Government Act that require the preliminary distribution of the ballot papers prior to the distribution of preferences. This severely limited the opportunity and quality of the scrutiny of the election. The preliminary distribution of preferences allows scrutineers to oversee the conduct of the election in an orderly sequential fashion, providing a means were a scrutineer can monitor the progression of the count. Whilst there is provision in the Act and Regulations for the Returning officer to vary the procedure used in an electronic count this does not necessitate or justify the refusal of the Returning officer to undertake a preliminary distribution prior to the data-entry and transcription of voter’s preference data.

Further more in the Chief Electoral Commissioner had compromised the integrity of the election by making allegations that were false and misleading in relation to the legitimate concerns expressed by members of the community as to the procedure of the counting of the ballot.

If confidence is to be maintained in the electoral process it is important that the returning office is independent from the direction or interference by the Chief Victorian electoral Commissioner. The Chief Victorian Electoral office has no legal to direct the returning officer in the fulfillment of their duties.

More information


Brian Walters Greens Policy Free Zone

The Age editorial endorsing the return of a Brumby Government highlighted the need for State planners and political parties to adopt policy that can contain the urban sprawl and growth of Melbourne. Both Labor and the Liberal Party have failed to put in place policies and planning for melbourne’s future growth.  This is the most pressing issue confronting Melbourne today.

In order to facilitate good governance and planning for Melbourne’s future it needs a central enlarged Greater Melbourne City administration.

The Greens candidate for Melbourne, Brian Walters, when ask to outline his policy and vision for a Great City of Melbourne stated he had no policy, no vision and proposal to address this issue. A policy free zoned on what is one of the most important environmental planning decision facing his electorate and the state.

Brian Walters does not deserve your support.  His only issue of concern has been his desire for recognition of Gay Marriage, An issue that falls within the authority of the Federal Marriage act is is not an issue of great concern to the Melbourne City electorate. Much more pressing issues such as the need for a Greater Melbourne City Council have been ignored

It is for this reason and the need to ensure we have a strong stable government that the Green’s should not be elected to represent inner city seats.

Brian Walters Greens Policy Free Zone

The Age editorial endorsing the return of a Brumby Government highlighted the need for State planners and political parties to adopt policy that can contain the urban sprawl and growth of Melbourne. Both Labor and the Liberal Party have failed to put in place policies and planning for melbourne’s future growth.  This is the most pressing issue confronting Melbourne today.

In order to facilitate good governance and planning for Melbourne’s future it needs a central enlarged Greater Melbourne City administration.

The Greens candidate for Melbourne, Brian Walters, when ask to outline his policy and vision for a Great City of Melbourne stated he had no policy, no vision and proposal to address this issue. A policy free zoned on what is one of the most important environmental planning decision facing his electorate and the state.

Brian Walters does not deserve your support.  His only issue of concern has been his desire for recognition of Gay Marriage, An issue that falls within the authority of the Federal Marriage act is is not an issue of great concern to the Melbourne City electorate. Much more pressing issues such as the need for a Greater Melbourne City Council have been ignored

It is for this reason and the need to ensure we have a strong stable government that the Green’s should not be elected to represent inner city seats.

Brian Walters Greens Policy Free Zone

The Age editorial endorsing the return of a Brumby Government highlighted the need for State planners and political parties to adopt policy that can contain the urban sprawl and growth of Melbourne. Both Labor and the Liberal Party have failed to put in place policies and planning for melbourne’s future growth.  This is the most pressing issue confronting Melbourne today.

In order to facilitate good governance and planning for Melbourne’s future it needs a central enlarged Greater Melbourne City administration.

The Greens candidate for Melbourne, Brian Walters, when ask to outline his policy and vision for a Great City of Melbourne stated he had no policy, no vision and proposal to address this issue. A policy free zoned on what is one of the most important environmental planning decision facing his electorate and the state.

Brian Walters does not deserve your support.  His only issue of concern has been his desire for recognition of Gay Marriage, An issue that falls within the authority of the Federal Marriage act is is not an issue of great concern to the Melbourne City electorate. Much more pressing issues such as the need for a Greater Melbourne City Council have been ignored

It is for this reason and the need to ensure we have a strong stable government that the Green’s should not be elected to represent inner city seats.

Melbourne Bound: New Federal Electorates

The Australian Electoral Commission has just released its proposed boundary changes for Federal Electorates in Victoria

Melbourne City Council remains covered by two Federal electorates. (Melbourne and Melbourne Ports).

The Inner City Boundaries are worth noting. The concept of Greater Melbourne is highlighted and demonstrates that the City of Melbourne would be best if it was exanded to reflect the proposed new boundaries for Melbourne and Melbourne Ports combined.

The various players will be watching very closely the demographic mix and voting patterns of the new Docklanders who will be voting for the first time on August 21.

Melbourne Ports has jumped the Yarra and taken in Docklands and has also lost a part of Caulfield. The Jewish sector in Melbourne Ports has significantly been reduced, which means that incumbent Federal Member Michael Danby may very well be looking at his last term of office and most likley be subject to a challenge in the lead up to the 2013 Federal election.

Cath Bowtell, if she can win the seat of Melbourne for the ALP, will be in a stronger position come 2013 as many expect the new city ‘Docklands’ precinct to not favour traditional Labor support. Trendy urban dwellers living in the new high rise developments are expected to potentially and naively favour the Greens or Liberal Party.

Adding to the ALP mix is that the former City of Prahran, with its injection of Public housing stock and the Windsor Estate is expected to off-set any downside of the Dockland precinct moving into Melbourne Ports but this is no comfort to Micheal Danby who has little support in Prahran.