Submission to Moreland Representation Review Victorian Electoral Commission [the uncensored version]

I’m pleased that your VEC Moreland Review prelim report.pdf “acknowledges the benefits of having an odd number of councillors. [Because]An odd number of councillors serves to prevent potential council deadlocks and so removes the need to confer on the Mayor the task of casting important deciding votes”. 

The first item on my preliminary submission was:-

►          1. You recommend a procedure to avoid drawing a name out of the hat to elect the mayor. (Actually, it is the casting vote for the council majority which would be the significant result.)

Your recommendation of an odd number of councillors removes the potential occasion of using a hat! That, in my view, would be a travesty of democracy. It did happen in the days of the Coburg Council. It might have been regarded as “fair” or “sporting” for the alternative political teams; it was not “equitable” in respect of the votes of the citizens of Coburg ( the municipality, which joined Brunswick to “reform” as Moreland).

My position is:-

►          that there are better instruments for expressing, then validly measuring, then representing the will of citizens individually and overall for equal effect, than the electoral system you appear to be leading us into.

►          I believe that the overall “two-party preferred” vote is a valid measure of the will of the citizenry.

 I like the proposed “structure” of eleven councillors to be elected from three wards, comprising two four-councillor wards and one three-councillor ward. Yet, the boys in the backroom know equal numbers of citizens per councillor can never prevent malapportion or gerrymander.

However, I ask:-

►          would it be possible under Victorian legislative requirements to have a notional “overall ward” to elect one councillor for each of the four-councillor wards?

That could go towards a “topping-up” mechanism to guarantee that the “side” chosen by the people could decide the “mayorality”, i.e., the government. Even having an odd number of councillors does not guarantee that. Furthermore, three wards means, three separate polls and elections. And even though it might look like equality to the candidate, councillor or electoral bureaucrat, it is not one-vote-one-value for each and every citizen, i.e., equal-effect.

I am not advocating a separate direct election for the mayor, as happens in some cities. But the reality is, there are ideological factions, political parties and caucusing. I approve of these as democratic; your preliminary report does not acknowledge they exist. I note your recognition of our multiplicity of “sub-communities”; I applaud how the ALP candidates represent them.

The majority caucus elects and sustains the “mayorality”, the casting vote and allocation of sub-committee / portfolio positions. The majority caucus at municipal, state and national levels is like an electoral college.

I did a tally of some of the words and phrases in your PRELIMINARY REPORT, Electoral Representation Review, Moreland City Council (1184Kb). Ask for a recount, if you like:-

democratic 2; democracy 0; “fair and equitable” 11; “fairness and equity” 1; fair[alone] 0; “equality of representation” 2; equality[alone] 3; political 0; party[as name of submission ] 3.

Respectfully Submitted,

Bill Helem, | bhelem@melbpc.org.au | www.mapdot.info/soapbox.htm | www.tinyurl.com/35hls | soapbox2.htm

A PDF version of above Submission to Moreland Representation Review Victorian Electoral Commission can be downloaded from this link. (16Kb)

---

| ^{To get yourself listed FREE, use on-line PenfriendLister Form}