The MLA for Riverton and State Treasurer has used a financial rating suggest that Canning council must go

The reality is that the Treasury calculations gave Canning a relatively low score because it failed to take into account key parts of the Canning council’s social attitude and financial management strategy.

Treasury calculated the costs of Canning’s commitment to community and aged care, but left out the grants it gets for this from the Commonwealth.

Treasury also failed to take into account that a repayment in relation to Canning’s self-supporting underground power scheme was a one off.

The Treasury model also gave a lower rating to Canning because Canning is able to adopt a balanced budget and use the surplus to assist in the following year, which keeps rates down.

However, this reduces the City’s operating income and lowers the Treasury rating.

If the Treasury model recognised a surplus (last one $10m), Canning would have got a higher rating.

So Mike, blame the Treasury, not Canning for the ranking of 28th. Treasury simply ignored key features of the Canning model for good local governance.