Chris Bowen (Prospect, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I am pleased to make some brief comments on this motion moved by the Minister for Local Government, Territories and Roads. Of course, local government is very important to people’s lives. Other honourable members have referred to this. Any honourable member who goes doorknocking, holds a mobile office or has any other form of community interaction would say that many of the issues that are raised with them are local government issues—less so than perhaps federal or state issues. Of course, local government affects people’s lives very directly.

In my case, I served for nine years in local government, including as a mayor, and as the President of the Western Sydney Regional Organisation of Councils, WESROC, in the fourth largest city in terms of population in New South Wales and the fifth largest city in Australia—Fairfield, which has 200,000 residents and a budget of $100 million. I have seen first-hand over those nine years in local government the stretch on resources faced by a council that is trying to do good work, that is trying to improve its community, but that is dealing with constant cost shifting from both federal and state governments, which come in and perhaps start programs and then abolish them. At this stage the community has come to expect them and has a real need for them and it is then incumbent on local government to continue them from a very limited funding base. I think there is much more scope for local government to be much more effective across the country with more support from both federal and state governments.

It is hard to disagree with the sentiments expressed in the motion moved by the minister, but I would like to deal with some of the matters of substance. The first matter I would like to deal with is funding. In 1996, the figure for financial assistance grants to local government as a percentage of Commonwealth tax revenue was 0.97 per cent. In 2006-07, it has fallen to 0.77 per cent and by 2009-10 the figure is estimated to fall to 0.75 per cent. I think that is a retrograde step and I would support the calls from the Australian Local Government Association to restore financial assistance grants to one per cent of Commonwealth tax revenue.

In fairness, I do know that there are other forms of grants for local councils, including Roads to Recovery, but financial assistance grants are grants which the council is allowed to spend on their priorities as they see fit. They are a level of government that is very close to the people and they know what priorities are important in their own area. I think the financial assistance grants are underdone and I think it would be a good thing if they returned to one per cent of Commonwealth taxation revenue, as they were under the previous government.

Perhaps even more importantly, I think one of this government’s most retrograde steps was the abolition of the Better Cities Program, the abolition of the Department of Housing and Urban Affairs and of the office of the Minister for Housing and Urban Affairs. Not only would I like to see the Better Cities Program reinstituted; I would like to see it reinstituted on an expanded scale. Local councils could do much for their local environment with more support from the federal government. I have seen local councils come up with great ideas and plans to improve their local environment, but they have very limited resources to do so.

The Better Cities Program would be one where federal and local councils could work together,  with assistance from state governments, to improve local environments and to do some really good things. The honourable member for Shortland particularly would know the benefits of the Better Cities Program through the Honeysuckle Development, which I know is not in her electorate but is in the general region.

See this speech in context