DOCSLIB.ORG

The NSW Redistribution 2005-06

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The NSW Redistribution 2005-06 Parliament of Australia Department of Parliamentary Services Parliamentary Library RESEARCH BRIEF Information analysis and advice for the Parliament 1 February 2007, no. 8, 2006–07, ISSN 1832-2883 'Save Country Seats': the NSW redistribution 2005–06 The recently-completed redistribution for the NSW House of Representatives seats was unusually controversial. There was concern in rural areas over the loss of a country seat— which was also a ‘Federation’ seat—and dismay over the apparent pushing–aside of the ‘community of interest’ principle by the Redistribution Committee. The controversy revealed a lack of community understanding of the redistribution process and an apparent reluctance by the Australian Electoral Commission to engage fully with the public. This paper discusses the controversy, analyses the changes to the redistribution that were made as a result the controversy, and poses the question of whether the redistribution arrangements need alteration. Scott Bennett Politics and Public Administration Section Contents Executive summary ................................................... 1 Introduction ........................................................ 2 When are redistributions held? ........................................... 2 Who conducts a redistribution?........................................... 3 Public input? ........................................................ 4 What are the aims of a redistribution? ...................................... 5 Equality ......................................................... 5 Enrolment quota ................................................. 5 Quota variation.................................................. 5 Projected average enrolment ........................................ 6 Other factors...................................................... 9 Division names................................................. 10 The 2005–06 NSW redistribution ........................................ 10 www.aph.gov.au/library The proposed redistribution—principles ................................. 10 The proposed redistribution—in practice ................................ 12 The reaction in the West ............................................ 17 Loss of a rural seat .............................................. 17 Community of interest............................................ 17 Members of Parliament and their constituents........................... 18 Loss of a Federation division ....................................... 19 The campaign to save Gwydir ........................................ 19 The final redistribution—west of the Divide .............................. 21 Gwydir, Parkes, Calare and Farrer ................................... 21 The ripple effect—Macquarie and Greenway ........................... 25 Looking back ...................................................... 26 A biased process? ............................................... 26 Are the redistribution rules suitable for a geographically-large nation? ......... 26 Can anything be done? ........................................... 27 Quota variation............................................... 28 Coping with distance .......................................... 28 Leeway for sparsely populated areas ............................... 28 Local voices................................................. 29 In conclusion—could public concerns have been lessened? ..................... 29 Listening to the public............................................ 29 Insufficient explanation of the case for change .......................... 30 Assertion is not proof ............................................ 30 Better public relations ............................................ 30 Appendix—Redistribution timetable...................................... 32 Endnotes.......................................................... 33 'Save Country Seats': the NSW redistribution 2005–06 Executive summary The 2005–06 redistribution of New South Wales House of Representatives divisions was controversial because of the loss of a rural division, but also because the Redistribution Committee decided to take a new approach to drawing boundaries. The Committee claimed that it was no longer relevant to see physical features as barriers to communication in electoral divisions where there were substantial transport and communications links, and based some decisions on that judgment. Despite the fact that many rural residents had called for the abolition of one of the Sydney seats that had suffered a decline in population, the redistribution proposal: • abolished the northern ‘Federation’ division of Gwydir • massively expanded the north-western division of Parkes • made the Bathurst-centred division of Calare much larger, and • extended Macquarie so as to have it partly in the Blue Mountains and partly beyond them. In western New South Wales the reaction was immediate and hostile, revealing a lack of public understanding of the redistribution process. Opponents criticised: • the disappearance of a rural division rather than a Sydney division • the loss of ‘community of interest’ in huge divisions • the difficulty rural MPs would have in servicing their constituents, and • the loss of a ‘Federation’ division. Prior to issuing the final redistribution, two officially-convened public meetings gave the members of a ‘Save Gwydir’ campaign the chance to address redistribution officials. Despite optimism that rural concerns had been heeded, the final redistribution still annoyed many: • ‘Gwydir’ as a division name was not saved • Calare was greatly enlarged, extending to the Queensland border, and • there was no joy for the opponents of the changes to Macquarie. Possible alterations to the redistribution system are discussed in the paper, though the politics involved in electoral redistributions suggest that this part of the electoral process is unlikely to be altered. The paper also asks whether the redistribution officials should have engaged more with the public throughout the redistribution. 1 'Save Country Seats': the NSW redistribution 2005–06 Introduction There are always winners and losers in each redistribution of House of Representatives divisions. A redrawing of boundaries can turn marginal divisions into safe divisions, safe divisions into marginal divisions, or even turn a division that is held by one party into a division that is nominally part of an opposing party’s tally. Redistributions can also have a major impact upon the careers of the men and women who seek office in our national parliament. In 1993 Steve Dubois (ALP, St George) retired from politics when his New South Wales division disappeared as a consequence of a redistribution. In 2003 the South Australian and Victorian redistributions helped bring about the retirement of Speaker Neil Andrew (Lib, Wakefield) and the electoral defeat of Martyn Evans (ALP, Bonython) and Christian Zahra (ALP, McMillan). The 2006 New South Wales redistribution will similarly be remembered by John Cobb MP (Nat, Parkes), whose reaction to the redistribution was to announce that he would leave the division he had won in 2001 to contest the greatly reshaped division of Calare.1 A similar conundrum faces the independent MP for Calare. Should Peter Andren remain with Calare— which he first won in 1998—or should he contest Macquarie, a division which had gained over 40 per cent of Calare’s voters? These events are a reminder that, apart from the actual elections themselves, ‘no process focuses the minds of those interested in politics more than the re-drawing of electoral boundaries’.2 While redistributions are significant events for Members of Parliament, for candidates, and for the political parties, just occasionally they can be seen to matter for ordinary Australians as well—as in New South Wales in 2005–06. Since changes introduced in 1984, however, this part of the electoral process has been relatively free from controversy. It was therefore not to be expected that the recently-completed redistribution for New South Wales House of Representatives divisions would prove to be unusually controversial. The controversy revealed a lack of community understanding of the redistribution process. This paper describes the process, discusses the controversy and analyses the changes to the redistribution that were made as a result. It also poses the questions of whether the redistribution arrangements need altering, and whether the Australian Electoral Commission (AEC) might have done more to conduct a dialogue with the public. When are redistributions held? The timing of redistributions is a matter of law, rather than the result of a government decision, as used to be the case.3 Formerly, all states were usually redistributed at the same time. Since legislative changes in 1984, redistributions are now held for individual states and territories when they fall due, with three ways in which a redistribution of a state’s or territory’s divisions can be triggered: (I) If there has been a shift in population altering a state’s or territory’s House of Representatives seat entitlement, a redistribution must be conducted. Since 1984 there have 2 'Save Country Seats': the NSW redistribution 2005–06 been 16 redistributions caused in this way: 1989 (Vic, WA), 1992 (NSW, Qld, SA), 1994 (Vic, Qld, ACT), 1997 (Qld, ACT), 2000 (WA, NT), 2003 (Qld, SA), 2005–06 (NSW, Qld). In 2005–06 redistributions were brought about by the New South Wales entitlement dropping from 50 to 49 seats, and Queensland’s entitlement rising from 28
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Swan and Helena Rivers Management Framework Heritage Audit and Statement of Significance • FINAL REPORT • 26 February 2009
    Swan and Helena Rivers Management Framework Heritage Audit and Statement of Significance • FINAL REPORT • 26 FEbRuARy 2009 REPORT CONTRIBUTORS: Alan Briggs Robin Chinnery Laura Colman Dr David Dolan Dr Sue Graham-Taylor A COLLABORATIVE PROJECT BY: Jenni Howlett Cheryl-Anne McCann LATITUDE CREATIVE SERVICES Brooke Mandy HERITAGE AND CONSERVATION PROFESSIONALS Gina Pickering (Project Manager) NATIONAL TRUST (WA) Rosemary Rosario Alison Storey Prepared FOR ThE EAsTERN Metropolitan REgIONAL COuNCIL ON bEhALF OF Dr Richard Walley OAM Cover image: View upstream, near Barker’s Bridge. Acknowledgements The consultants acknowledge the assistance received from the Councillors, staff and residents of the Town of Bassendean, Cities of Bayswater, Belmont and Swan and the Eastern Metropolitan Regional Council (EMRC), including Ruth Andrew, Dean Cracknell, Sally De La Cruz, Daniel Hanley, Brian Reed and Rachel Thorp; Bassendean, Bayswater, Belmont and Maylands Historical Societies, Ascot Kayak Club, Claughton Reserve Friends Group, Ellis House, Foreshore Environment Action Group, Friends of Ascot Waters and Ascot Island, Friends of Gobba Lake, Maylands Ratepayers and Residents Association, Maylands Yacht Club, Success Hill Action Group, Urban Bushland Council, Viveash Community Group, Swan Chamber of Commerce, Midland Brick and the other community members who participated in the heritage audit community consultation. Special thanks also to Anne Brake, Albert Corunna, Frances Humphries, Leoni Humphries, Oswald Humphries, Christine Lewis, Barry McGuire, May McGuire, Stephen Newby, Fred Pickett, Beverley Rebbeck, Irene Stainton, Luke Toomey, Richard Offen, Tom Perrigo and Shelley Withers for their support in this project. The views expressed in this document are the views of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the EMRC.
    [Show full text]
  • Land Degradation and the Australian Agricultural Industry
    LAND DEGRADATION AND THE AUSTRALIAN AGRICULTURAL INDUSTRY Paul Gretton Umme Salma STAFF INFORMATION PAPER 1996 INDUSTRY COMMISSION © Commonwealth of Australia 1996 ISBN This work is copyright. Apart from any use as permitted under the Copyright Act 1968, the work may be reproduced in whole or in part for study or training purposes, subject to the inclusion of an acknowledgment of the source. Reproduction for commercial usage or sale requires prior written permission from the Australian Government Publishing Service. Requests and inquiries concerning reproduction and rights should be addressed to the Manager, Commonwealth Information Services, AGPS, GPO Box 84, Canberra ACT 2601. Enquiries Paul Gretton Industry Commission PO Box 80 BELCONNEN ACT 2616 Phone: (06) 240 3252 Email: [email protected] The views expressed in this paper do not necessarily reflect those of the Industry Commission. Forming the Productivity Commission The Federal Government, as part of its broader microeconomic reform agenda, is merging the Bureau of Industry Economics, the Economic Planning Advisory Commission and the Industry Commission to form the Productivity Commission. The three agencies are now co- located in the Treasury portfolio and amalgamation has begun on an administrative basis. While appropriate arrangements are being finalised, the work program of each of the agencies will continue. The relevant legislation will be introduced soon. This report has been produced by the Industry Commission. CONTENTS Abbreviations v Preface vii Overview
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Report 2020 Facts and Trends 2019/20 2
    ANNUAL REPORT 2020 FACTS AND TRENDS 2019/20 2 Import Coal Market at a Glance 2017 2018 2019 World Hard Coal Production Mill. t 6,852 7,064 7,257 World Hard Coal Trade Mill. t 1,267 1,324 1,336 of which seaborne hard coal trade Mill. t 1,157 1,208 1,221 of which internal hard coal trade Mill. t 110 116 115 Hard Coal Coke Production Mill. t 633 646 682 Hard Coal Coke World Trade Mill. t 26 28 26 European Union (28) Hard Coal Production Mill. TCE 81 76 67 Hard Coal Imports (incl. internal trade) Mill. t 172 166 134 Hard Coal Coke Imports Mill. t 9.1 9.0 9.5 Germany Hard Coal Use Mill. TCE 50.0 48.7 38.7 Hard Coal Volume Mill. TCE 51.6 47.1 37.9 of which import coal use Mill. TCE 47.9 44.4 37.9 of which domestic hard coal production Mill. TCE 3.7 2.7 0.0 Imports of Hard Coal and Hard Coal Coke Mill. t 51.4 47.0 42.2 of which steam coal 1) Mill. t 36.3 32.5 29.2 of which coking coal Mill. t 12.9 12.4 11.2 of which hard coal coke Mill. t 2.3 2.1 1.9 Prices Steam Coal Marker Price CIF NWE US$/TCE 98 108 72 Border-crossing Price Steam Coal €/TCE 92 95 79 CO2 emission rights (EEX EUA settlement price) EUR/EUA 5.83 15.82 24.84 Exchange rate (US$1 = €....) EUR/US$ 0.89 0.85 0.90 1) Including anthracite and briquettes Quelle: ??? 3 AN INTRODUCTORY WORD In 2020, it will be decided to end coal-fired power generation.
    [Show full text]
  • VOTES and PROCEEDINGS No
    1978-79-80 THE PARLIAMENT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES VOTES AND PROCEEDINGS No. 144 TUESDAY, 19 FEBRUARY 1980 1 The House met, at 2.15 p.m., pursuant to adjournment. Mr Speaker (the Right Honourable Sir Billy Snedden) took the Chair, and read Prayers. 2 DEATHS OF FORMER SENATOR (MR S. K. AMOUR), FORMER SENATOR AND MEMBER (THE HONOURABLE J. A. GUY) AND FORMER MEMBER (SIR WINTON TURNBULL): Mr Speaker informed the House of the deaths of: Mr Stanley Kerin Amour, on 29 November 1979, a Senator for the State of New South Wales from 1938 to 1965; The Honourable James Allan Guy, C.B.E., on 16 December 1979, a Member of this House for the Division of Bass from 1929 to 1934 and the Division of Wilmot from 1940 to 1946, and a Senator for the State of Tasmania from 1950 to 1956, and Sir Winton Turnbull, C.B.E., on 14 January 1980, a Member of this House for the Division of Wimmera from 1946 to 1949 and the Division of Mallee from 1949 to 1972. As a mark of respect to the memory of the deceased all Members present stood, in silence. 3 PETITIONs: The Clerk announced that the following Members had each lodged petitions for presentation, viz.: Mr Aldred, Mr Bourchier, Mr Braithwaite, Mr Bungey, Dr Cass, Mr Howe, Mr Johnston, Mr B. O. Jones, Mr Katter, Mr Lloyd, Mr Lynch, Mr Millar, Mr Peacock, Mr Shipton, Mr Simon and Mr Staley-from certain citizens praying that the National Women's Advisory Council be abolished.
    [Show full text]
  • Proposed Redistribution of Victoria Into Electoral Divisions: April 2017
    Proposed redistribution of Victoria into electoral divisions APRIL 2018 Report of the Redistribution Committee for Victoria Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918 Feedback and enquiries Feedback on this report is welcome and should be directed to the contact officer. Contact officer National Redistributions Manager Roll Management and Community Engagement Branch Australian Electoral Commission 50 Marcus Clarke Street Canberra ACT 2600 Locked Bag 4007 Canberra ACT 2601 Telephone: 02 6271 4411 Fax: 02 6215 9999 Email: [email protected] AEC website www.aec.gov.au Accessible services Visit the AEC website for telephone interpreter services in other languages. Readers who are deaf or have a hearing or speech impairment can contact the AEC through the National Relay Service (NRS): – TTY users phone 133 677 and ask for 13 23 26 – Speak and Listen users phone 1300 555 727 and ask for 13 23 26 – Internet relay users connect to the NRS and ask for 13 23 26 ISBN: 978-1-921427-58-9 © Commonwealth of Australia 2018 © Victoria 2018 The report should be cited as Redistribution Committee for Victoria, Proposed redistribution of Victoria into electoral divisions. 18_0990 The Redistribution Committee for Victoria (the Redistribution Committee) has undertaken a proposed redistribution of Victoria. In developing the redistribution proposal, the Redistribution Committee has satisfied itself that the proposed electoral divisions meet the requirements of the Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918 (the Electoral Act). The Redistribution Committee commends its redistribution
    [Show full text]
  • Voters' Partisan Behaviour and Government's Election Strategies for Local Funding Provision: Theory and Empirical Evidence in Australia
    Voters' Partisan Behaviour and Government's Election Strategies for Local Funding Provision: Theory and Empirical Evidence in Australia Muhammad F. NORAZMAN (B.Economics) Supervisor: Dr. Eran Binenbaum November 1st 2013 Thesis is submitted to the University of adelaide, School of Economics as partial fullment for the completion of the Honours degree of Bachelor of Economics School of Economics Declaration Except where appropriately acknowledged this thesis is my own work, has been expressed in my own words and has not previously submitted for assessment. Muhammad Fadhli Norazman November 1st 2013 i Acknowledgements Firstly, I would like to thank my God for giving me thoughts and ideas when I needed them most. Secondly, I would like to thank my supervisor, Dr Eran Binenbaum for guidance and feedbacks during the completion of this thesis. Thirdly, I would like to thank Aqilah who has been always supporting me in every aspects during the hardship of honours year. I also would like to thank Dr Nicholas Sim who has provided me with useful comments on econometrics methodology. It is also important to mention Assoc Prof Mandar Oak who has given me useful ideas and foundations of political economics, Dr Jacob Wong, Assoc Prof Ralph Bayer and Dr Dmitry Kvasov for providing me with deeper knowlegde in economics. I also want to thank the academics who have been giving useful feedbacks during honours presentation, stas of School of Economics who have provided me with technical support and my family in Malaysia who always be there for me when I needed them. I also appreciate the presence of my honours friends who helped me out and cheered me up day and night.
    [Show full text]
  • 28 June 1994
    2341 ?Utgxutatwcp Qlorw Tuesday, 28 June 1994 THE PRESIDENT (Hon Clive Griffiths) took the Chair at 3.30 pm, and read prayers. STATEMENT BY THE LEADER OF THE OPPOSITION .ADDRESS-IN- REPLY Presentationto Governor - Non-attendance of OppositionMembers HON JOHN HALDEN (South Metropolitan - Leader of the Opposition) [3.31 pmil - by leave: The Opposition will be declining the offer to attend upon His Excellency on this occasion to present the Address-in-Reply speech. Last week's events clearly demonstrate why the Opposition has taken this action. I do not believe it will be of interest to the House to debate this matter again. BILLS (7) - ASSENT Messages from the Lieutenant Governor received and read notifying assent to the following Bills - 1. Secondary Education Authority Amendment Bill 2. Fisheries Amendment Bill 3. Pearling Amendment Bill 4. Totalisator Agency Board Betting Amendment Bill 5. State Bank of South Australia (Transfer of Undertaking) Bill 6. Fire Brigades Superannuation Amendment Bill 7. Local Government Amendment Bill PETITION - LOGGING OF HESTER STATE FOREST Departmentof Conservation and Land Management Proposal HON J.A. SCOTT (South Metropolitan) [3.35 pm]: I present the following petition signed by 13 citizens of Western Australia - To the Honourable the President and Members of the Legislative Council in Parliament assembled. We the undersigned, are very concerned at the management practices of the Department of Conservation and Land Management in the Bridgetown- Greenbushes Shire. We request the Legislative Council to
    [Show full text]
  • Building Nature's Safety Net 2008
    Building Nature’s Safety Net 2008 Progress on the Directions for the National Reserve System Paul Sattler and Martin Taylor Telstra is a proud partner of the WWF Building Nature's Map sources and caveats Safety Net initiative. The Interim Biogeographic Regionalisation for Australia © WWF-Australia. All rights protected (IBRA) version 6.1 (2004) and the CAPAD (2006) were ISBN: 1 921031 271 developed through cooperative efforts of the Australian Authors: Paul Sattler and Martin Taylor Government Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage WWF-Australia and the Arts and State/Territory land management agencies. Head Office Custodianship rests with these agencies. GPO Box 528 Maps are copyright © the Australian Government Department Sydney NSW 2001 of Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts 2008 or © Tel: +612 9281 5515 Fax: +612 9281 1060 WWF-Australia as indicated. www.wwf.org.au About the Authors First published March 2008 by WWF-Australia. Any reproduction in full or part of this publication must Paul Sattler OAM mention the title and credit the above mentioned publisher Paul has a lifetime experience working professionally in as the copyright owner. The report is may also be nature conservation. In the early 1990’s, whilst with the downloaded as a pdf file from the WWF-Australia website. Queensland Parks and Wildlife Service, Paul was the principal This report should be cited as: architect in doubling Queensland’s National Park estate. This included the implementation of representative park networks Sattler, P.S. and Taylor, M.F.J. 2008. Building Nature’s for bioregions across the State. Paul initiated and guided the Safety Net 2008.
    [Show full text]
  • House of Representatives
    1954-55. ALPHABETICAL LIST OF MEMBERS OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. SESSION OF THE TWENTY-FIRST PARLIAMENT. (Sittings-From 4th August, 1954, to 28th October, 1955.) (House of Representatives dissolved 4th November, 1955.) Name. Division. State. I i Adermann, Charles Frederick, Esquire, Fisher Queensland Chairman of Committees Allan, Archibald Ian, Esquire Gwydir New South Wales Anderson, Gordon, Esquire Kingsford-Smith New South Wales Andrews, Thomas William, Esquire Darebin Victoria Anthony, Hon. Hubert Lawrence Richmond.. New South Wales Barnard, Lance Herbert, Esquire Bass Tasmania Bate, Henry Jefferson, Esquire Macarthur New South Wales Beale, Hon, Howard, Q.C. Parramatta New South Wales Beazley, Kim Edward, Esquire .. Fremantle.. Western Australia Bird, Alan Charles, Esquire Batman Victoria Bland, Francis Armand, Esquire Warringah New South Wales Bostock, William Dowling, Esquire, C.B., Indi Victoria D.S.O., O.B.E. Bourke, William Meskill, Esquire Fawkner Victoria Bowden, George James, Esquire, M.C. Gippsland Victoria Brand, William Alfred, Esquire Wide Bay Queensland Brimblecombe, Wilfred John, Esquire Maranoa Queensland Brown, Geoffrey William, Esquire, M.B.E.(a) McMillan .. Victoria Bruce, Hon. Henry Adam Leichhardt Queensland Bryson, William George, Esquire Wills Victoria Burke, Thomas Patrick, Esquire Perth Western Australia Calwell, Hon. Arthur Augustus Melbourne Victoria Cameron, Hon. Archie Galbraith, Speaker Barker South Australia Cameron, Clyde Robert, Esquire Hindmarsh South Australia Cameron, Donald Alastair, Esquire, O.B.E. Oxley Queensland Casey, Rt. Hon. Richard Gardiner, C.H., La Trobe .. Victoria D.S.O., M.C. Chambers, Hon. Cyril.. Adelaide South Australia Clarey, Hon. Percy James Bendigo Victoria Clark, Joseph James, Esquire Darling New South Wales Cope, James Francis, Esquire(b).
    [Show full text]
  • Working Paper 04/2018
    Working Paper 04/2018 The geography of Australia’s Marriage Law Postal Survey outcome Tom Wilson Northern Institute, Charles Darwin University Fiona Shalley Northern Institute, Charles Darwin University Francisco Perales Institute for Social Science Research, The University of Queensland ISSN 2207-3388 Abstract After years of public debate about same-sex marriage, the Australian Government put the issue to the electorate in the ‘Australian Marriage Law Postal Survey’ in late 2017. The survey asked voters whether the law should be changed to allow same-sex couples to marry. Nationally, 61.6% of voters responded ‘Yes’. But there were marked variations by electoral division, with the proportion of ‘Yes’ votes varying from 26.1% to 83.7%.The aim of this paper is to explore the geographical pattern of the percentage of voters responding ‘Yes’ by federal electoral division and identify its correlates. Results of the survey by federal electoral division were obtained from the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS); other variables for electoral divisions were obtained from the ABS and the Australian Electoral Commission. Multiple linear regression and geographically weighted regression were employed to establish the relationship between the percentage of ‘Yes’ responses at the electoral-division level and the characteristics of electoral divisions’ populations. In 133 of 150 electoral divisions there was a majority of ‘Yes’ responses. Strong predictor variables of the percentage ‘Yes’ vote included the proportions of: the population describing themselves as having no religion, those with post-school educational qualifications, those with a birthplace in Oceania, Europe or the Americas, and those who did not vote for conservative parties in the 2016 federal election.
    [Show full text]
  • Office of Profit Under the Crown
    RESEARCH PAPER SERIES, 2017–18 14 JUNE 2018 Office of profit under the Crown Professor Anne Twomey, University of Sydney Law School Executive summary • Section 44(iv) of the Constitution provides that a person is incapable of being chosen as a Member of Parliament if he or she holds an ‘office of profit under the Crown’. This is also a ground for disqualification from office for existing members and senators under section 45. There has been considerable uncertainty about what is meant by holding an office of profit under the Crown. • First the person must hold an ‘office’. This is a position to which duties attach of a work-like nature. It is usually, but not always the case, that the office continues to exist independently of the person who holds it. However, a person on the ‘unattached’ list of the public service still holds an office. • Second, it must be an ‘office of profit’. This means that some form of ‘profit’ or remuneration must attach to the office, regardless of whether or not that profit is transferred to the office- holder. Reimbursement of actual expenses does not amount to ‘profit’, but a public servant who is on leave without pay or an office-holder who declines to accept a salary or allowances still holds an office of profit. The source of the profit does not matter. Even if it comes from fees paid by members of the public or other private sources, as long as the profit is attached to the office, that is sufficient. • Third, the office of profit must be ‘under the Crown’.
    [Show full text]
  • Supplementary Agenda of Extraordinary Council
    Mayoral Minute MM1 Extraordinary Meeting Venue: Administrative Headquarters Civic Place Katoomba Meeting: 7.30pm 2 June, 2015 - 2 - EXTRAORDINARY MEETING 2 JUNE 2015 AGENDA ITEM PAGE SUBJECT COMMENTS NO. MINUTE BY MAYOR MM1 4 Redistribution of Federal Electoral Boundaries in New South Wales - 3 - MINUTE BY MAYOR Item MM1, Ordinary Meeting, 02.06.15 ITEM NO: MM1 SUBJECT: REDISTRIBUTION OF FEDERAL ELECTORAL BOUNDARIES IN NEW SOUTH WALES FILE NO: F08771 - 15/99475 Delivery Program Link Principal Activity: Civic Leadership Service: Governance and Risk Recommendations: 1. That Council notes the Australian Electoral Commission is currently considering the boundaries of the Federal Electorate of Macquarie; 2. That the Council reaffirms its desire to keep the seat as closely aligned as possible with the Local Government Area, noting the tourism and economic significance of this region, including being a World Heritage area, which demonstrate a custodial responsibility for the Blue Mountains at all levels of government; and 3. That the Council writes to the Australian Electoral Commission (AEC) under the signature of the Mayor asking for Macquarie to contain the whole of the Blue Mountains Local Government Area after any redistribution. Mayoral Minute Reason for report That Council notes the Australian Electoral Commission is currently considering the boundaries of the Federal Electorate of Macquarie. Consequently, Council resolves to write to the Australian Electoral Commission (AEC) before the cut-off this coming Friday under the signature of the Mayor asking for Macquarie to contain the whole of the Blue Mountains Local Government Area after any redistribution. Background A redistribution of federal electoral boundaries in New South Wales is required following a determination on 13 November 2014 of the number of members of the House of Representatives to which each state and territory will be entitled at the next federal general election.
    [Show full text]