Local government, we often hear, is the level closest to the people. Roads, rates and rubbish is the old mantra.
But councils have far greater responsibilities. They support local economic development and environmental protection, and provide social, recreational and cultural services.
The local level is far more complex than most people recognise. Even fewer people understand the often arcane processes and procedures that accompany this complexity.
It is also the tier of government that often nurtures wider political ambitions and local fiefdoms. Big frogs in small ponds, where bad behaviour is not unknown. Sitting in the public gallery at a council meeting can be to experience something of a parallel universe. Local councils have been described as a comfortable place for old men, and the honour boards hanging in most council chambers confirm that suspicion.
That representation is changing, slowly, to something that more broadly reflects the community. But there are structural barriers that stop younger people, and those from diverse backgrounds, from putting their hand up.
This is a particular problem in small regional and rural areas.
In northern New South Wales, Kyogle council has been experiencing turmoil since the last election of December 2021. A bungled attempt at sacking the general manager in April 2022 led to a staff and public revolt. The surprise but successful sacking of the same GM in December 2023 – at what was then the last scheduled meeting for two months – led to a deeper revolt. This included staff motions of no-confidence in the elected council and a petition to the minister for local government asking for council to be dismissed and an inquiry held into its actions.
The council’s actions have focused attention on the local level, airing a serious and creeping problem. At the last election there were just 12 nominations vying for nine positions. In one of Kyogle’s three wards, the nominees were all sitting councillors.
Kyogle is far from isolated in this regard. Of the 124 NSW councils where elections were held in 2021, 54 had fewer than two candidates for each position. The majority of these were rural and regional councils. This can only be bad for local democracy.
And it may affect performance. Councils who do not attract enough candidates for a contest of ideas, and a range of age, gender and life experiences for electors to choose from, are likely to be more prone to suffer complacency, leading to under-performance or malfunction.
There are many reasons for the small number of candidates. There is the complexity of local government and the workload, along with increasingly uncivil behaviour. That poor behaviour, which will be stress-inducing to some level, can be between councillors themselves, where the winner-take-all numbers game prevails, and where established players have been known to undermine and intimidate the newly elected.
Increasingly, poor behaviour can be attributed to members of the public and conspiracy groups attending council meetings to protest, disrupt and spread misinformation. In response to this, the Municipal Association of Victoria, along with the University of Melbourne, is offering an online course on recognising and managing disinformation.
One mayor of a large regional NSW council not seeking re-election says the “general nastiness of a portion of people is really off-putting – the expectation that you are meant to be available 24/7 and driven by social media”.
The poor financial return is undoubtedly a major disincentive. Councillors are paid a fee, set by a remuneration tribunal.
And it’s a low fee. In small councils with populations of less than 20,000, including Kyogle, councillors receive between $9,850 and $13,030 a year. Mayors get an additional fee of between $10,490 and $28,430.
In regional centres with populations up to 40,000, such as Bega, Griffith and Singleton, councillors receive between $9,850 and $21,730. Mayors receive an additional fee of between $20,980 and $47,420.
As councillors vote on the level of remuneration they will pay themselves, it’s reasonable to assume most opt for the higher end. Even so, it’s a low financial return for the effort required. This is well established as a major factor in the low numbers of younger people willing to stand for election.
In its 2023 report the NSW local government remuneration tribunal noted “there would be merit in a comprehensive review of the framework for mayor and councillor remuneration”. In its 2024 report the tribunal awarded a 3.75% increase to mayors and councillors.
In speaking to the increase, a spokesperson for the local government minister, Ron Hoenig, noted that remuneration was determined by an independent process. The minister’s office has been asked why the same independent process that recommended a comprehensive review was disregarded. No response has been received.
While an increase in councillor remuneration would affect the state budget, what value do we place on local democracy?
