IN response to the front-page report in the March 4 edition headlined ‘Fears over merger costs’, I fail to see any issue of importance that would impeded the devolution of parts of the perimeter of the present City of Stirling area of 105sq/km and 210,000 ratepayers/electors.
Recently we have been plagued with poor decision making regarding rubbish collecting and recycling.
The theme portrayed in the article insinuates that the City will be worse off. Nothing could be further from the truth.
No one is going to cheat anyone out of property or entitlements. The word reform indicates, ‘reforming’.
It’s all local government.
In addition, I think it is a bit rich that the Member for the North Metropolitan Region, MLC Ljijanna Ravlich, can question this reform when, as the Minister for Local Government in the last Labor Government, it abandoned the attempt at reform under her watch.
A matter that has annoyed me is the rejection by this Government of having a plebiscite relating to, among other things, first past the post, preferential or a combination of both for election results, compulsory voting and mayors elected by the council or ratepayers.
As to the issue of political parties nominating and funding candidates, definitely not. Although many councils have both main political party members as representative councillors, they are not ‘badged’ representation.
The City of Stirling reducing in size by 15 per cent would put it in the same area of representation as Wanneroo and Joondalup councils.
That would give the proposed new councils a good representative base.
The reform would provide more equity in size to create more positive economies and efficiencies.
ROBERT MITCHELL, Karrinyup