RCoW Elections 2005: A need for change

The time has come to comtemplate local governance over the next three years. Are we prepared to accept more of the same or do we expect something better?

Whilst five of our current councillors have declared they will stand again, we need to find out what they stand for. Considering they were elected to represent wards, we need to hear from them how they plan to govern the whole of the municipality. Standing on their record simply means more of the same.

It has been eight years since amalgamation and the State Government, in its wisdom, has reviewed the performance of all local governments. In reducing the number of councillors and abolishing wards, the Victorian Electoral Commission obviously found need for change in the Rural City of Wangaratta. It is now up to the voters to elect those who can bring about the required change. But, what changes do we need?

We have no idea of the shortcomings the VEC found that caused them to restructure our municipality. However, as a ratepayer, I have some definitive thoughts.

I believe the council too readily accepts state government funding simply because it is available. Benalla turned down library funding because they could not justify the ongoing expense. Wangaratta, on the other hand, restructured the council office complex and the library to form a joined-up Government centre and entered a joint venture to relocate the library to the TAFE campus. The residents of the municipality have gained nothing from this venture except a debt amounting to several million dollars.

To combat the forecast stagnation in population growth over the next eight years, our council has gone for immigration - seeking migrants from overseas to keep the population growing. Our federal MHR, Sophie Panopoulos, boasts that Wangaratta has the lowest rural unemployment in all of Australia. The major unfulfilled employment in the region appears to be seasonal work in the orchards and vineyards. In the longer term, bringing migrants in may create more problems than it solves.

I believe a more effective option would be to go for in-migration ... attracting Australian citizens from the major cities. Much of the municipality could be classified as 'lifestyle amenity' which those seeking a 'tree change' lifestyle could migrate to. This would entail allowing five acre subdivisions throughout the rural areas where farming has become increasingly less viable.

Migrant seasonal workers will not bring families. Population growth is about babies being born. With children comes the need for infrastructure. That can only benefit the municipality as a whole.

Our council also needs to cater equitably to all residents throughout the municipality. Rural properties pay higher rates than urban properties yet there is a higher proportion of infrastructure development in the city than in the rural areas.

We have an opportunity to elect independent councillors not aligned with any particular interest group be it a ward, business, rural, or whatever. The need for change has been thrust upon us by the VEC restructure. Let us not waste the opportunity.