Leppert wants Horse and Carriages out of Princes Bridge Bike Lane blocking traffic

Melbourne Green Councillor Rohan Leppert wants Melbourne’s Horse and Carriages banned from using the Princes Bridge Bike Lane forcing them into using the single traffic lane that crosses the Yarra river.

Worst part is lack of adherence to road rules by Horse Drawn Vehicles. Illegal to travel in bike lane but many still do – dangerous. — Rohan Leppert (@RohanLeppert) July 31, 2013

In Rohan Leppert’s mind the interests of cyclists come first and all others, with the exception of members of Occupy Melbourne and residents of North Melbourne, a distant second.

The Horse and Carriages travel at the speed of 6km per hour.  To force them into the traffic lane particularly during peak hour traffic or at night when the bike lane is empty would cause more congestion on an already congested road.

The proposed St Kilda Rd Bike Lane will force Horse and Carriages into the main traffic lane again blocking traffic.  Horse and Carriages are a legitimate means of transport that run on bio fuel and have every right to use the roads. By using the bike lane they allow traffic, which is already congested as a result of the Princes Bridge lane closure to flow.   When the Horse and Carriages used the main traffic lane motorist opted instead to enter into the bike lane to pass the carriage. Something they are allowed to do up to 50 metres under current road rules.  A situation which would be more disruptive and unsafe for cyclists.  Solution allow Horse and Carriages to use the bike lane.

Horse and Carriages is another problem identified with the proposed St Kilda Rd 350m bike lane.  Horse and Carriage operators never consulted over the proposed design nor were a number of other stakeholders including Motorcycle and Scooter riders not consulted. With up to 12 Horse and Carriage operators in the City using the St Kilda Rd/Gardens route one of the St Kilda Road traffic lanes will be blocked. Greens solution ban horse and carriages and cars.

Leppert Occupies the Melbourne Den

Greens Melbourne City Councillor, Rohan Leppert, plays cheap divisive politics and in the process brings the City Council into disrepute.

Rohan Leppert was elected to the City of Melbourne last October, his election was due to a flaw in the method of counting the vote which inflated the value of the Greens at the expense of Team Doyle. 8% of Melbourne voters were disenfranchised as a result of the system of proportional representation and the use of the Droop quota. Under the Droop quota the total number of vote is divided by ten and a slice of the cake discarded

Analysis of the  2012 City of Melbourne votes, using a full proportional voting system where the cake is divided into nine slices, indicates that Rohan Leppert would not have been elected, in his place community candidate Kevin Chamberlin should have been elected.  A pure proportional system would not have discarded or disenfranchised Team Doyle’s 8% surplus, each vote would have equal weight.

Rohan Leppert is calling on the City Council to refer the conduct of the Victorian police to the newly created IBAC anti-corruption body.

Rohan Leppert will not secure support for what is widely considered to be pure opportunism and grandstanding.   More importantly it is an abuse of process. If Rohan Leppert sincerely believes that the events surrounding the Occupy Melbourne protest warrants criminal investigation and review by IBAC he could have acted as an individual or with the support of other organization. IBAC ahs much more important issues to consider then frivolous political opportunism.  further there are other avenues for review that should be considered prior to referral to IBAC

Rohan Leppert is a clear indication the style of  politics advocated by the Greens.   There are much more pressing issues such as the need to restore open and transparent governance in the City Council, issues related to traffic management, infrastructure,  planning ,finance and electoral reform that need addressing that Rohan Leppert has not addressed. 

Whilst Rohan Leppert seeks to claim the mantle of civil libertarian the fact is he is naive and undemocratic.  The Greens themselves are renowned for the lack of transparency in there party policy development with Journalists denied access to their state conference forums.  Rophan Leppert himself has also been critic for banning those critical of Green policies from following him on Twitter.  A case of do as he says not what he does.

Rohan Leppert, having been elected to the City Council  must also consider his fiduciary duty to the Council as a whole and the  Councils local laws not sectional political grandstanding.

This issue would also be a test of integrity for other City Councillors including Jackie Watts, Richard Foster and Stephen Mayne.

Then and Now: Doyle backs down from Legal Challenge: Decisions by Proxy

Robert Doyle on the run backs down on legal challenge of integrity Then … and Now

Councillors Richard Forster, Rohan Leppert and Stephen Mayne have already reneged on their commitment to Open and Transparent Government

Richard Foster said “he also wanted to increase the public’s perception of the council’s integrity by ending the policy of closing council meetings

 “Doing nothing is not an option“.- Richard Foster “Our Melbourne” @Richo_Foster That is until he was elected. Policy and commitment for Open and transparency out the window. 

Within less than 2 months of being elected @Richo_Foster continued practice of secret meetings behind closed doors locking out the public .

Greens’ Rohan Leppert “there were issues of transparency that needed to be addressed“. Leppert, like that of his predecessor Greens Councillor  Fraser Bindley before him, also supported closed meetings subverting s89 LGA

Self proclaimed “Transparency advocate” and new councillor Stephen Mayne @MayneReport has also continued the practice of secret meetings subverting s89 of the LGA

On November 27 The City Council held a “Decision by Proxy” Councillor Forum meeting locking out the public and community.  No reports and no minutes, No accountability.  No Transparency. Policy on the run hidden from public view. 

  • Open and transparent systems permit everyone to make informed choices, and give everyone access to information in an easily understood format

    Accountability is acting responsibly and being answerable for actions taken

    A lack of openness, transparency and insufficient accountability creates the conditions in which corruption flourishes

    The Internet is the ideal medium for cost effective delivery of information maintaining open and transparent government (eGovernance)



Section 89 Victorian Local Government Act 1989

Meetings to be open to the public

  • 89. Meetings to be open to the public

    (1) Unless subsection (2) applies, any meeting of a Council or a special
    committee must be open to members of the public.

    (2) A Council or special committee may resolve that the meeting be closed to
    members of the public if the meeting is discussing any of the following-

    (a) personnel matters;

    (b) the personal hardship of any resident or ratepayer;

    (c) industrial matters;

    (d) contractual matters;

    (e) proposed developments;

    (f) legal advice;

    (g) matters affecting the security of Council property;

    (h) any other matter which the Council or special committee considers
    would prejudice the Council or any person;

    (i) a resolution to close the meeting to members of the public.

    (3) If a Council or special committee resolves to close a meeting to members
    of the public the reason must be recorded in the minutes of the meeting.

    (4) Unless subsection (4A) applies, a Council must at least 7 days before the
    holding of-

    (a) an ordinary council meeting; or

    (b) a special council meeting; or

    (c) a meeting of a special committee comprised solely of Councillors-

    give public notice of the meeting.

    (4A) If urgent or extraordinary circumstances prevent a Council from complying
    with subsection (4), the Council must-

    (a) give such public notice as is practicable; and

    (b) specify the urgent or extraordinary circumstances which prevented the
    Council from complying with subsection (4) in the minutes.

    (5) The Chairperson of a special committee that is not comprised solely of
    Councillors must provide reasonable notice to the public of meetings of the
    special committee.