LOCAL GOVERNMENT (BOUNDARY REFORM) AMENDMENT BILL

Introduction and First Reading

The Hon. R.B. SUCH (Fisher) (11:06): Obtained leave and introduced a bill for an act to amend the Local Government Act 1999. Read a first time.

Second Reading

The Hon. R.B. SUCH (Fisher) (11:07): I move:

That this bill be now read a second time.

As members would appreciate, I have tried before to get significant reform in terms of metropolitan councils, and I will keep on advancing the reform agenda. I point out to members, who might want to follow up with their own research, that in New Zealand, where I think the Premier is good friends with several of the leading members of the Labor Party, they have had a significant reform process, and that reform process is continuing; they are currently reforming the Auckland City Council.

What is significant, and this is where members need to pay particular regard in terms of their research, is that people often say, 'Oh, you'll take the local out of local government,' which is a catchcry you often hear. What they have done in New Zealand, and I think it is a good model, is that, whilst they are making the councils larger overall, streamlining them and so on, they have created and have kept within them local advisory bodies, which ensure that there is a local component. I agree with the catchcry 'Keep them local', and you can do that, but you can still reform the overall structure.

This bill seeks to create a metropolitan council boundaries reform commission, headed by a former judge of the Supreme Court. That judge, through the boundaries reform commission, would report back to parliament no later than 30 June 2011—so, over a year away. The commission would look at and report on the appropriate number and configuration of metropolitan councils, taking into account the size and area of metropolitan Adelaide, the desirability of the efficient administration of councils, and other matters that the commissioner considers relevant.

When the commission reports to parliament, it would set out the findings of the commission's inquiry and it would make recommendations as the commission thinks fit as to the appropriate number and configuration of metropolitan councils. The boundaries commission in my proposal would have the power of a royal commissioner and, as a process, would have the power of a royal commission.

Once the report had been presented to parliament, the minister responsible would respond by 31 December 2011, making recommendations, if any, relating to what the commission has proposed, whether they are agreed to, whether they should be carried, and so on. It is quite a lengthy process, but it needs to be a thorough one because you obviously need to allow all interested parties to make a submission. People often say, 'Why do we need to change in the metropolitan area?' We have 19 councils from Gawler to Noarlunga. Business SA has argued for, I think, three or four; others have argued for different numbers. The Motor Trade Association has also argued for—

Mr Pengilly: How many do you want, Bob?

The Hon. R.B. SUCH: The member for Finniss asks what number I want. If I knew the number I would not be proposing an inquiry into the number. It is the role of the commission to look at what is the desirable number. Others have suggested different numbers. The Motor Trade Association, as I indicated, is unhappy with the current arrangement, as is Business SA.

I will have a look at a couple of factors that need to be considered. There is the potential to save millions of dollars in metropolitan Adelaide with restructuring and reorganisation. The salaries of Adelaide metropolitan councils' CEOs—and I am not picking on them, I am just using this as part of the case—exceed $4 million. The salary of the CEO of Brisbane, which has one council and a similar population, the latest figure we can get is $410,000 a year. The CEO of the city of Adelaide's salary is almost that. If you could not save some money there, there would be something wrong.

Going beyond that, and more importantly, there are 19 council chambers, 19 works depots, 19 different approaches to things in the metropolitan area. The cost of that is enormous. As I say, I am not advocating one council, but if you use Brisbane as a guide, the Brisbane City Council has almost exactly the same number of employees as we have in all 19 councils in Adelaide (about 8,000), and its budget, which is more than double that of the metropolitan councils of Adelaide, is $2 billion—bigger than Tasmania.

Mr Pengilly interjecting:

The Hon. R.B. SUCH: There are one million people in Brisbane; in the area that the council administers there are about one million people, and its budget is $2 billion (more than Tasmania), while the budget for the combined councils in Adelaide is just over $1 billion. The elected members in metropolitan Adelaide, the volunteers, mayors and others, number approximately 300. In Brisbane they have just over 20 paid members, but the cost there is less.

As I say, I am not arguing for the Brisbane model, I am just pointing out that that council, with the same number of staff, runs not only the council functions that we have in Adelaide now, but they run the water and sewerage and public transport as well. So, if you could not save millions of dollars here through the cooperation and greater linkage of councils to a reduced number, then I would be absolutely amazed. We do not even have a joint waste collection in Adelaide—some councils work together—we do not even have joint tendering. The potential for savings is enormous.

I want to be brief to enable others to have some time this morning, but I would urge members to have a look at this. I have been in local government—not for a long time—and I have great respect for what happens in local government, but it is time to have a look at whether we have the most efficient and effective arrangement in the metropolitan area. I would be interested to hear what the member for Mount Gambier has to say, I think Grant and Mount Gambier might be a case that could be looked at, but apart from that I think that rural councils are a different scenario to what currently exists in the metropolitan area.

I urge members to have a look at this proposal objectively, put aside any prejudices they may have about some of the catchcries that are trotted out, and let us have a look and see if we can come up with a model, with input from councils and everyone else in the community, which serves the people of Adelaide effectively and efficiently but still retains the local character, which is what has happened in New Zealand. I would urge the Premier and others to travel to New Zealand to have a look at what has happened there and see the sort of model that I am talking about.

I commend this bill to the house and urge members to have an objective look at what I am proposing.

Debate adjourned on motion of Mr Sibbons.