DEMOCRACY GEELONG CITIZENS’ JURY IN GEELONG - BACKGROUND PAPER How do we want to be democratically represented by a future council? © The State of Victoria Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning August 2016 This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International licence. You are free to re-use the work under that licence, on the condition that you credit the State of Victoria as author. The licence does not apply to any images, photographs or branding, including the Victorian Coat of Arms, the Victorian Government logo and the Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning logo. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ISBN 978-1-76047-223-8 (Print) ISBN 978-1-76047-224-5 (pdf/online) Accessibility If you would like to receive this publication in an alternative format, please contact the Local Government Act Review Secretariat: email [email protected] or phone (03) 9948 8518. This publication is also available on the internet at www.yourcouncilyourcommunity.vic.gov.au. Disclaimer This publication may be of assistance to you but the State of Victoria and its employees do not guarantee that the publication is without fl aw of any kind or is wholly appropriate for your particular purposes and therefore disclaims all liability for any error, loss or other consequence which may arise from you relying on any information in this publication. TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION 4 1.1 What has happened to bring Greater Geelong to this point? 4 1.2 Why is the community being consulted and what infl uence will it have? 5 1.3 Overview of the community consultation approach 6 1.3.1 What is the purpose of this consultation? 6 1.3.2 How will the community’s views be heard? 6 1.3.3 How is the jury selected? 9 1.4 About this paper and supporting documents 10 1.4.1 Background Paper – Supporting practical recommendations 10 1.4.2 Supplementary Paper – Supporting aspirational recommendations 11 1.4.3 Policy and legislative framework 11 2 DEMOCRATIC REPRESENTATION AND GOOD GOVERNANCE 12 2.1 Introduction 12 2.2 Democratic representation 13 2.2.1 Fair and equitable representation 13 2.2.2 VEC indicative criteria for councillor numbers 13 2.2.3 Ward boundaries: the 10% rule 14 2.2.4 Types of representation 15 2.3 Good governance 15 2.3.1 Councillors, chief executive offi cer and staff 15 2.3.2 Electoral structures and governance 17 2.3.3 Other factors affecting governance 19 3 ELECTORAL STRUCTURE OPTIONS 20 3.1 Overview 20 3.1.1 Electoral structure components 20 3.1.2 Overview of Victorian electoral structures 20 3.2 Mayor 24 3.2.1 Role and powers 24 3.2.2 Election 24 3.3 Deputy mayor 26 3.4 Councillor numbers 27 3.4.1 Councillor numbers, population and size of the municipality 27 3.4.2 Councillor numbers and ward structures 28 3.4.3 Councillor numbers and decision-making 28 3.5 An unsubdivided municipality or wards 29 3.5.1 Victorian and Australian context 29 3.5.2 An unsubdivided municipality 29 3.5.3 Single-member wards 31 3.5.4 Uniform multi-member wards 33 3.5.5 Non-uniform multi-member wards 33 3.5.6 Mixed single- and multi-member wards 34 KEY DOCUMENT LINKS 36 APPENDIX 1 ABOUT GREATER GEELONG 38 APPENDIX 2 COMMISSION OF INQUIRY FRAMEWORK FOR GOOD GOVERNANCE 42 APPENDIX 3 RECOMMENDATIONS FROM COMMISSION OF INQUIRY 44 APPENDIX 4 VOTE-COUNTING SYSTEMS 46 3 1 INTRODUCTION Notes on this paper: This Background Paper has been prepared by Local Government Victoria (LGV) and covers some of the ideas for the “practical” options for a future electoral structure for Greater Geelong. Practical is defi ned as being compliant with Victoria’s local government legislative framework. The Supplementary Paper provides some other ideas and options from academics in Australia and internationally that refl ect “aspirational” thinking about ways to potentially improve local democracy in Greater Geelong. Note from newDemocracy Foundation on the sources of information in this paper: This document is your fi rst step in getting enough background to make an informed decision. We encourage you to remember that there is no perfectly neutral information – every document has an author with a point of view who makes decisions about what to include and leave out. As you read, do so with a critical eye. Think about questions you may want to ask or other sources you may want to hear from in order to challenge or verify a view. 1.1 What has happened to bring Greater Geelong City Council Community Greater Geelong to this point? Priorities Scheme Investigation There have been a number of recent The Local Government Investigations and investigations and reviews at Greater Geelong Compliance Inspectorate (Inspectorate) City Council (the council) based on events conducted an investigation into the council’s over the last decade. These investigations Community Priorities Scheme (Scheme) in and reviews have found deep-seated cultural 2014. The Scheme was a type of councillor and corporate governance issues at the discretionary funding program enabling ward council. Where relevant, their fi ndings and councillors to allocate council funds to projects recommendations are referred to in other within their own wards. The Inspectorate found parts of this paper. Additionally, the Victorian that the Scheme allowed ward councillors to act Electoral Commission (VEC) recently conducted without transparent and accountable decision an electoral representation review for the making in their allocation of a signifi cant council and made its fi nal report in amount of funding ($59 million) between mid-March 2016. 2005 and 2013. The council discontinued the Scheme and councillor discretionary funding The fi ndings from three recent investigations was prohibited following an amendment to and the VEC review are summarised in this the Local Government Act in 2015 based on section. the Inspectorate’s recommendations in the Inspectorate Report into discretionary funding published in October 2013. 4 Democracy In Geelong - Background paper Workplace Culture Review VEC electoral representation review A Workplace Culture Review was undertaken This review was required under legislation at the council in 2015 at the request of the and included the number of councillors and Minister for Local Government. This was in the electoral structure of the council (whether response to public allegations of bullying at the council should be unsubdivided or divided t h e c o u n c i l . T h e r e v i e w w a s c o n d u c t e d b y into wards and, if subdivided, the details of the Ms Susan Halliday, the former Sex and Disability wards). The VEC could not consider the positions Discrimination Commissioner. Her report of mayor or deputy mayor in its review. The included the results of an independent Culture legislation also required a reduction in councillors Review Quantitative Report by EY Sweeney. from 13 (including the mayor) to a maximum of It identifi ed serious cultural and governance 12 for the next general elections onward. In its issues at the council, including bullying, fi nal report, the VEC recommended the council inadequate handling of complaints, breaches of consist of 11 councillors elected from three three- the Councillor Code of Conduct by councillors councillor wards and one two-councillor ward, initiating contact with and instructing lower in addition to the mayor. level staff in the performance of their duties, sexist and aggressive conduct and a lack of 1.2 Why is the community being understanding of basic governance principles consulted and what infl uence by councillors, including confl ict of interest. will it have? Commission of Inquiry into Greater Geelong In April 2016, the Victorian Parliament passed City Council legislation to dismiss the council and provide In response to the fi ndings from the Workplace for the election of a new council in October Cultural Review, the Minister for Local 2017. During the debate of this legislation, the Government established an independent government committed to consult the Greater Commission of Inquiry to inquire into the Geelong community about the structure of its adequacy of the governance arrangements future elected council. at the council. The Commission of Inquiry The citizens’ jury is the primary method the fo u n d t h a t t h e c o u n cil w a s d ys f u n c t i o n a l . government has selected to consult the It made 12 recommendations (see Appendix 3), community. four for government and eight for the council administration. The government accepted Citizens’ juries are powerful examples of all recommendations from the report and deliberative democratic engagement. introduced legislation to implement three of the Deliberation is a balance of two key elements: four recommendations for government. These the broadest array of information available, and three recommendations were to dismiss the an equal opportunity for participants to share elected council and appoint administrators, their views and contribute to the discussion implement a directly elected deputy mayor and debate. Citizens’ juries involve selecting a to support and share the workload with the random sample of people, providing them with directly elected mayor and implement multi- access to information and expertise about the councillor wards. matters they are considering and the time to discuss the issues and reach an agreed position. The jury then reports their fi ndings which the government then uses when making decisions about the matters. 5 The structure of a future elected council is 1.3 Overview of the community not a simple matter.