Merger makes no sense
At a recent public meeting held in the Lockhart Council Chamber on January 11, 2016, attended by approximately 200 citizens, it was unanimously decided that Lockhart Shire should stand alone.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
The Lockhart Shire has shown it has the financial resources and financial stability to stand alone and succeed.
So why trash a shire that ticked all the boxes in the “Fit for the Future” questionnaire.
If this unbelievable grouping comes to fruition then from an administration aspect the centre of the shire should be Urana.
But of course that would never happen with Corowa having the largest population of three administration centres. So Lockhart, which is over 100kms from Corowa, could easily become a forgotten area.
For local government to function efficiently the administration centre should be somewhere near the centre of the shire and that is what make the Lockhart Shire so successful.
If Corowa became the administration centre, Lockhart`s representation would be severely diminished. At present Lockhart Shire has nine dedicated councillors, if Corowa takes over, one, two maybe three? We have seen it happen in other shires with a very large town within its boundary.
A good example is Wagga which has only one rural-based councillor.
This shire is rural-based, where as Corowa on the Murray River with its towns of Mulwala and Howlong rely on tourism. Also Corowa has extensive light industry. Lockhart Shire has very little in common with Corowa Shire. To put them together would be a disaster. It has as much credibility as the amalgamation of an AFL team with a Rugby League team.
That’s why Lockhart Shire must stand alone, try and understand this merger is completely unnecessary and if implemented would completely “gut “the entire Lockhart shire.
John Irons
Lockhart
Ridiculous proposal
Premier Baird’s announcement about forcibly merging local councils was totally without any basis or merit.
The government keeps talking about “four years of consultation”, but they have now overturned the recommendations from all these earlier reports.
Professor Graham Sansom, who was the government's expert adviser on council reform, has said these latest forced merger proposals “fail the test” of good reform.
The last four years was just a pseudo-consultation, just like the legalistic “tick the box” paperwork currently underway with their so-called “delegates”.
Premier Baird will obviously get the answers he expects from this pseudo-consultation. Local communities should make their views known, and put in submissions.
But the Government is not really interested in what local communities have to say.
We are taken aback by the comments from some Government MPs that they could ‘no longer lobby the minister directly on behalf of councils’ as the Boundaries Commission was now involved.
Local MPs are elected by their community to represent them. There is absolutely no reason that they should not be lobbying as strongly as they can.
No one in NSW believes Premier Baird would have announced these forced mergers without the agreement of his local Coalition MPs.
In the end, it will be the local Government MPs – Liberals and Nationals – who will decide whether they are prepared to stand up for their communities, and demand that Premier Baird lets their local councils stay local.
Peter Primrose
Shadow Minister for Local Government