Mike Seccombe on NSW Premier "Teflon Mike" Baird

Journalist Mike Seccombe writing in The Saturday Paper on 11 June 2016:

People tagged him “Teflon”, because nothing stuck to Mike Baird.

Called to leadership in inauspicious circumstances two years ago, he was clean, shiny and charismatic. And also bold. He determined to privatise the state’s electricity distribution system. Many other governments had foundered on the issue, but Baird took it to last year’s election and still won a thumping majority.

He was one of those rare politicians who transcended his party. He became not just a state premier but also a national political role model to many. When the federal Coalition government was going badly under Tony Abbott’s leadership, Mike Baird was most often cited as the alternative ideal.

And no wonder. For almost two years he was by far the most popular political leader in the nation.

But no more. According to the most recent Morgan poll of national leaders, Baird has been bested for the first time since he became premier of New South Wales…..

Baird is not under imminent threat, but he is “Teflon Mike” no more.

These days he is more commonly described as “Casino Mike”, a reference to his government’s endlessly obliging approach to James Packer’s plan for the giant development at Barangaroo. Since it was originally, controversially approved under former premier Barry O’Farrell, the development has grown 100 metres in height and its floor space has more than doubled in size.

It has not escaped the critics’ attention that the Packer family are among the biggest donors to Baird’s party. Nor that the state’s controversial lockout laws, intended to stop late-night, alcohol-fuelled assaults, do not apply to the very violent precinct around the city’s existing casino, The Star, and also excise Barangaroo.

But there is a lot more to his decline than that, as was evidenced a couple of weeks ago when thousands of protesters descended on central Sydney. They came with a smorgasbord of issues, ranging from the local – the route of contentious WestConnex motorway, the axing of scores of ancient fig trees to facilitate construction of a light rail project – to the general – the sacking of 42 local councils across the state, draconian police powers and anti-protest laws, cuts to school and TAFE funding and the government’s extensive privatisation agenda.

Quite suddenly, an awful lot of things are sticking to Baird. The punters are increasingly questioning his motives and the insiders are questioning his political judgement.

In February, when the federal government was floundering about seeking a tax reform agenda, there was no stronger advocate of an increased GST than Baird.

“I am convinced our political leaders and our community are ready to take the right, hard decisions for our future,” he said…..

It’s not just that Andrews read the wind better. It’s that the GST business served to underline something about Baird that people were already starting to realise: this “moderate” Liberal is actually very hardline on matters economic. The former investment banker is a deep neoliberal.

The government’s record of privatisation tells the story, says the Greens’ David Shoebridge.

“He’s sold the big ticket items: electricity generation, electricity transmission, ports. And now they’re looking around for things people would have thought immune.”

It is quite a list. Care services to 50,000 elderly and disabled residents living in their homes have been privatised. Three hundred inner-city housing commission properties have been sold for some $500 million, to fund the building of new accommodation miles away in the outer suburbs of the Illawarra and Blue Mountains.

And, most recently, the state’s land titles service has been privatised.

“The land titles system delivers about $60 million to the state each year. It’s a profit centre for government, but it seems any profit centre, any service they can identify they are ideologically committed to selling,” Shoebridge says.

“It puts a corruption risk at the heart of land titles in NSW.”

Of course, such criticism is unsurprising from a political opponent, particularly from the Greens. But it is echoed by the Law Society of NSW.

The sale should not proceed, said society president Gary Ulman, out of concern about “adequate protection of sensitive data, the continued implementation of best practice anti-fraud measures”.

The Baird government’s determination to guard the interests of the private sector is nowhere more obvious than in its approach to those who protest against coal and coal seam gas developments.

Legislation passed in March increased tenfold the fines faced by protesters to $5500 and provided for jail for up to seven years for “unlawful aggravated entry” to mine sites. The new laws also gave police new search and seizure powers and allowed them greater latitude under “move on powers” to break up demonstrations.

“This changed laws in place since 1901,” the chief executive and principal solicitor with the state’s Environmental Defenders Office, Sue Higginson, says.

“They have turned them into laws that privilege a particular component of society, the business community.”

The new anti-protest laws, in force from this week, are but one aspect of the progressive erosion of civil liberties under this government, Shoebridge says. 

“They have criminalised protest. So many police powers have been extended, so much court oversight has been removed that we have the machinery in place for a police state… A police officer can prohibit you from going to a club, to your church or mosque, your political meeting.”

Shoebridge’s critique might sound extreme were it not for the fact that the legal community – the Law Society and Bar Association – concur.

In a statement in April, the president of the NSW Bar Association, Noel Hutley, described the serious crime prevention orders legislation as “an unprecedented attack on individual freedoms and the rule of law”. 

“The bill creates broad new powers which can be used to interfere in the liberty and privacy of persons and to restrict their freedom of movement, expression, communication and assembly,” he said. “The powers are not subject to necessary legal constraints or appropriate and adequate judicial oversight and in many cases basic rules of evidence are circumvented.”

His detailed critique was utterly swingeing. His reflection on the attitude of the government to civil liberties was damning.

This is a government not averse to applying blunt force to opponents. The saga of local council amalgamations provides another example.

Leaving aside the matter of whether amalgamating small councils into bigger ones is desirable – though there has been strong community resistance – it is the way the government went about it that is troubling.

They simply sacked them and installed in their place administrators who will run the councils until September next year. The administrators are in many cases the same people who advised amalgamation or political fellow travellers of the government – former conservative politicians or party apparatchiks…..

The giant accounting firm KPMG was employed as an independent arbiter of the financial benefits of the mergers. Documents have since surfaced suggesting the firm was not independent at all, but was engaged specifically to make the case for amalgamations.

The Land and Environment Court has ordered the government to provide documents about the role KPMG played in implementing the council amalgamation agenda.

Baird faces a long succession of legal actions.

Then there is the environment, where further changes are imminent under legislation due for introduction in the spring session of parliament.

“We’re talking about wholesale changes to an entire suite of environmental laws,” Sue Higginson says. “We’re talking about simply throwing out some of the global leading-edge laws dating back to the Carr government. Our view is that this is a catastrophic step backwards.”

The new laws, she says, open the way for broad-scale land clearing by rural landholders.

Jeff Angel, of the Total Environment Centre, takes up the story: “It allows clearing for almost any purpose, with minimal consent and monitoring. It’s appalling.

“Frankly, the more we look at it, the more it looks like [the laws introduced by the former Campbell Newman government in] Queensland.”……

Read the full article here.

Australian Federal Election 2016: are Baird's forced council amalgamations hurting Team Turnbull's chances in NSW?

About 27% of the NSW population lives in one of the nineteen new councils created yesterday. Another 21% lives in the nine proposed councils which will be created once the current court action is resolved. If Newcastle is also merged and its council sacked, that will be a majority of the NSW population living in an area with no elected local representation. [The Tally Room, 13 May 2016]

Google Images March 2016

NSW Premier Mike Baird has been careful over the years to position himself as being in sympathy with the aims and major policies of the Abbott-Turnbull Government and, in its turn this federal government has supported his slashing of the number of local government areas which will see an est. 48 per cent of the state’s population being without elected councillors for at least twelve months.

That's up to 3.66 million individuals living in households who may be more than a little cranky with the Lib-Nats for what has happened to their local council and approximately another 3.97 million people living in local government areas that are in the firing line the next time Premier Baird decides to whittle away at the most immediate tier of democracy in Australia.

Coalition MPs hoping to retain their seats come 2 July must be hoping that none of them read the newspaper over breakfast (or click onto social media) between now and then.

How the NSW council amalgamation issue played out in mainstream media thus far......

The Sydney Morning Herald, 18 March 2016:

At Liberal party functions in his seat of Wentworth in Sydney's east, Malcolm Turnbull is fond of introducing his staff member, Sally Betts as the most powerful person in Sydney's east. It usually gets a chuckle, particularly since he became Prime Minister.

Ms Betts is the grandmotherly figure who works two days a week in his electorate office while also serving as Waverley Council's mayor……

If Betts had not got on board with the Baird government's amalgamations push, the state government would have faced a solid wall of opposition from Liberal councils. Instead Betts and her Liberal counterpart in Randwick offered the first chink in council resistance, giving the state government cause to claim the councils were divided on the issue……

Daily Telegraph, 9 May 2016:

Tony Abbott has thrown his support behind the formation of one northern beaches council under Premier Mike Baird’s amalgamation reforms.

“I can see the arguments both ways. I would probably lean towards a whole of peninsula council if we are going down the amalgamation path,” he said.

“It’s a question of balancing out the local attachment with the need for efficient service delivery.”….

However once Malcolm Turnbull called the double dissolution election for 2 July this year matters became more complicated and federal influence on the Baird Government more obvious.

The Australian

12 May 2016:

The state government initially put forward 35 amalgamations in what would have been the biggest reform of local government in NSW since 1948.

But it is likely that cabinet will drop some of the proposals, with suggestions that the process has been influenced by political considerations, including opposition from local MPs and concerns about whether they will affect the chances of federal MPs.

After state cabinet considers the mergers, a special partyroom meeting will be held to endorse them…..

13 May 2016:

But the state government has placed a potential bomb under the Coalition’s campaign by proceeding with mergers in a number of marginal seats, including the bellwether Eden-Monaro, and ­Dobell and Robertson on the NSW Central Coast.

In Eden-Monaro, held by the Liberals’ Peter Hendy on a narrow margin, the government has, among other mergers, approved the joining of the rural Palerang council with the Queanbeyan town council.

Former Palerang mayor Peter Harrison says his former council is a poor fit with Queanbeyan given the different demography. He says locals fear their rates will be consumed by Queanbeyan and that there will be less money for maintenance of local roads.

“Palerang is quite unique. The majority of people live in rural residential areas. It does not have urban centres,” Mr Harrison said.

The Baird government dumped a proposal to merge the Kiama and Shoalhaven councils, affecting the marginal seat of Gilmore, held by the Liberals’ Ann Sudmalis, and another affecting the seat of Macquarie, held by the Liberals’ Louise Markus, after a government-appointed delegate recommended against it.

It ignored its own proposal to merge Tamworth and Walcha councils in New England, where Mr Joyce is battling former independent MP Tony Windsor.

Deputy Premier Troy Grant said he had two calls from Mr Joyce about the amalgamations, but denied he had an influence.

Delegate Amanda Chadwick recommended Walcha and Tamworth councils merge, and the proposal was supported by the Boundaries Commission.

Mr Baird denied that the decision not to proceed with some of the mergers was driven by political considerations, saying it was purely a matter of what was in the interest of ratepayers.

The mergers will reduce the number of councils in NSW by 37. The number of councils in Sydney is to be slashed from 43 to 25. Yesterday the government sacked all councillors in merged councils, appointing ­administrators in their place, and delayed local elections in ­affected areas until September next year.

Mr Baird said he had “absolute confidence” the mergers would result in better outcomes for ratepayers.

But the Baird government limited the financial benefits of the mergers by demanding the new councils not sack any workers, except executives. Employees in towns smaller than 5000 are permanently protected…..

News.com.au, 17 May 2016:

A few months ago people were talking up Mike Baird’s personal popularity, saying it could soften any swing towards Labor in NSW including in the eight marginal seats of Barton, Eden-Monaro, Dobell, Reid, Banks, Page, Gilmore and Lindsay.

But that was until the NSW government announced plans on Thursday to sack councils across the state and create 19 new ones……

Then the ugly underbelly of Mike Baird’s governance style was exposed for all to see.

The Sydney Morning Herald

1 June 2014:

In a potentially explosive development for the Baird government, the Land and Environment Court has ordered it to provide documents about the role KPMG played in implementing the council amalgamation agenda.

Strathfield Council and others are alleging a serious misrepresentation by the Baird government after discovering that KPMG has been involved in devising the merger proposals as early as July 2015 – before the government announced it was proceeding with forced amalgamations – yet it was deemed the independent arbiter of the financial benefits of the mergers.

A document seen by The Sydney Morning Herald entitled "Options Analysis: Local Reform" and marked cabinet-in-confidence was dated July 8, 2015.

"OLG [Office of Local Government] has commissioned KPMG to support development of a robust evidence base to support the NSW government's Fit for the Future agenda," the document says.

This was well before the government announced the results of the Fit for the Future review by the Independent Pricing and Regulatory Tribunal, which assessed the health of councils to either stand alone or merge. It was also before the government announced its plans to force mergers.

In a press release issued on the day the government announced its preferred mergers in January 2016, Premier Mike Baird and the Minister for Local Government Paul Toole described the role of KPMG, which calculated the savings of each merger, as "independent"……

2 June 2016:

The state government has defended the independence of the consulting firm whose sums were the basis for its controversial push to slash Sydney councils.

Accounting and consulting giant KPMG, whose figures have been used to justify the government's controversial merger policies, donated about $100,000 to the NSW Liberal Party shortly before the elections that brought the Coalition to power in 2011.

The firm was also paid about $870,000 to audit Liberal Party accounts in 2015…..

"How can you claim KPMG's report on your forced council mergers is independent," asked the opposition spokesman on Planning and Infrastructure, Michael Daley, in question time in the NSW Parliament on Thursday.

The attack comes a day after the Land and Environment Court demanded the government produce documents relating to KPMG's modelling, which has been central to making the case for the government's council merger policies.

That resulted from a legal challenge to the merger of Strathfield Council and two others in the inner west, which revealed KPMG had been working on merger proposals before the government announced it was proceeding with the policy.

"The lack of independence of KPMG has always been a central part of our case," said the lawyer for Strathfield Council, Tim Robertson.

And you thought local government amalgamation news couldn't get any worse......

The Sydney Morning Herald, 28 March 2016:

NSW councillors have been told to reapply for their jobs, as the NSW government lays the groundwork to terminate existing councils as early as next month and begin amalgamations.

On Thursday, all councillors received a letter from the Minister for Local Government Paul Toole, telling them he was considering interim arrangements for councils until elections are held after September. He said he was looking at options of a single person acting as administrator of a new merged council, or the continuation in office of some or all of the councillors in the new larger council area.

Councillors have been ordered to  submit an expression of interest by April 15, explaining why they would be suitable for the interim council or why they are qualified to act as an administrator.

General managers and mayors are also required to apply for the jobs in the new larger councils.

This is despite the Boundaries Commission still having to report on the merger proposals, most of which are being resisted by existing councils.

Most public inquiries have finished and the delegates for each council area are preparing their reports. They will then go to the minister and to the boundaries commission. The minister then makes a decision to accept or reject the finding on the merger. But given this is the minister's blueprint, most councils expect him to forge ahead with mergers, possibly as soon at the end of April…..

To date a search of the NSW Boundaries Commission website does not list Tweed Shire Council, Ballina Shire Council, Byron Shire Council, Clarence Valley Council, Lismore City Council, Richmond Valley Council and Kyogle Council (which comprise the NSW Northern Rivers region) as being affected by this round of local government amalgamations.

However, it would be foolish of local communities to ignore the fact that some Northern Rivers mayors and general managers would favour amalgamation - seeing it as the road to increased personal incomes, greater power and wider political influence - and indeed may be quietly indicating to the Baird Government that amalgamation into a larger local government area is their preference.

Maclean public car park, Cameron and McLachlan parks: he said, she said

Having recently listened to Clarence Valley councillors debate before voting to deny a $2.8 million boutique redevelopment of the older-style Surf Motel in Yamba, primarily on the basis that the architect had kept the allegedly 100 year-old frontage footprint in the plans before council and the lift well was 97cm higher than allowed with part of the rear of the building 27 cm higher than allowed, I can appreciate the sense of frustration building in a section of the Maclean community at the same nine councillors approach to the latest move by the company behind the IGA supermarket development.

The Maclean dispute has a long history and it’s not only the siting of the supermarket which has changed - some individual positions have also changed. Cr. Sue Hughes now supports the IGA supermarket development (with subsequent loss of parts of Cameron and McLachlan parks as well as part of the public car park) which started the row back in 2011-12.

Along the way there has also been one very odd instance of time and money wasting on council’s part which failed to amuse many Maclean locals.

Now it appears a war of words has erupted within the community and is being played out in the pages of one valley newspaper.

Open Letter to Clarence Valley Council in The Daily Examiner, 25 February 2015:

Dear Councilors,

We understand many Councilors perceive the activities of the Greater Maclean Community Action Group as negative and reactionary. Unfortunately that perception has arisen following public delivery of an objective and responsible planning assessment made of the proposed supermarket in Maclean's car park. Council only last Tuesday has voted to proceed with the rezoning of this application without having any proper understanding of what the full implications are.

For Councillors to understand the "negativity" from the residents we represent, a step back is needed to look at what has happened to Maclean.  It is no longer negativity they will see; it is now a considerable anger.  Maclean isn't dying, it is being killed.

Everyone sees the need for a "supermarket anchored shopping centre" (a direct quote from the now outdated Retail Strategy).  That is nothing like what is being proposed.  There is absolutely no provision for future growth or expansion.  Hasn't this Council ever heard of "long term planning"?

We have observed as a group this Councils lack of expertise and commitment to even the most basic concept of "Assets and Risk Management" and the pretence of public consultation.  Implicit in the process of Consultation is the recognition of the opinions expressed, acquiescence or rational informed debate to the contrary, and above all, feedback.  Council doesn't even pretend to do that.  If public consultation and "planning" were anything more than "box ticking", there just may have been some acknowledgement in the 10 year plan that Grafton is at high risk of becoming a rural backwater when the new Harwood Bridge and Pacific Highway are completed.  The State Corrective Services seem to have already realised that and no reasonable person actually believes there will be a second bridge over the Clarence at Grafton.

As for Maclean, in 10 years this Council has delivered very little positive value to the town.  But the negatives are numerous and significant.  There has not been so much as a new rubbish bin put in this town over all that time.  The main street is breaking up and will soon look like a patchwork quilt, if indeed it is patched at all.  The only new footpath constructed by Council in 10 years is 13 metres from the CBD car park. It was constructed by throwing dry mix asphalt over grass, and is now almost completely overgrown. We now stand to lose most of what little green space we have in central Maclean and the destruction of the heritage in McLachlan Park seems imminent. We did, however, get a new toilet block which wasn't needed when there was already a perfectly good one just needing overhaul, at a fraction of the cost of the new one. I won't go further with the list but suffice to say it is very long.

The public meeting on Monday last was not sponsored by Council.  It should have been!  It explained very professionally exactly what was proposed in the DA for the supermarket and how it would impact on the town. It was the result of lot of effort by the Maclean Action Group and it drew the wholehearted support of the 3,000-strong Maclean Bowling Club.  There has been absolutely no response from Council to the issues presented. Public consultation is a box to be ticked and the responses are simply ignored. The supermarket debacle is only one of the many examples.

There were comments that audio visual presentation was difficult to hear and see.  Let me say that the Bowling Club is not a theatre and neither is the RSL.  Maclean has no theatre or anywhere else that is remotely suitable for public meetings or presentation using standard audio visuals.  There is a Civic Hall that is more than 100 years old, has a leaking roof and severe water damage to the ceiling and roof structure.  It is in that state because successive Councils have not carried out even basic routine maintenance.  I know of people who have left this town because they have to drive to Yamba to find anywhere they can have a family picnic and watch their children play.

Major trees (75-100 years old) have been removed and not replaced eg. the Taloumbi St Jacaranda and Fig trees.  The only four Camphor Laurels to be removed because of their genus are in one of only two small parks left in the town, if indeed the nature strip along the river can be called a Park.  There are estimated to be over 2000 Camphor Laurels growing in the Valley on public land but only the four delivering shade and ambience in Maclean are programmed for destruction and no "program" for the progressive removal and or replacement of the species exists.  Why the four in a Park in Maclean and why do this when the residents are overwhelming against it? Why would a Council crying poor even consider spending scarce cash on something like this? It's illogical and irrational.

However, all of that aside, the single most appalling facet of this Council Administration has to be the erratic and inconsistent application of its own drafted Policies, procedures and regulations.  Is it any wonder that the major investors bypass this Valley? It is just not worth the trouble, as the IGA no doubt is now starting to realize.  And that is why we will have to send our children away to find decent employment, and why we will pay rates 30% higher than inner city suburbs in Brisbane, and most other places in the State.

Do not for one moment interpret the absence of a Lower Clarence Candidate in the recent Council bi-election as an indication of complacency or acquiescence. It wasn't!  The years of disregard for the views and aspirations of the people of the Lower Clarence and the quest for responsible and professional planning may well materialize into something far more tangible in the lead-up to the next Council general election.

Ian Saunders, Hon Secretary GMCAG

A somewhat less than polite response published in The Daily Examiner, 27 February 2015:

COUNCILLORS, I am apologising in advance that you have had to put up with the blatant lies which have emanated from the Maclean Inaction Group letter.

A group of 100 people does not and will not ever represent the sum of all opinions on any matter, let alone that regarding a supermarket. It certainly does not represent the whole 3000 members of the bowling club.

It is unfortunate that the current discussion to move the supermarket does look like a variation on a plan, but it will undoubtedly be a better solution if shoppers have the current tar car parking to use while the supermarket is being built.

But let's get back to the letter:

Accusing the council of no provision for future growth. WRONG.

There is ample space for future growth, and this supermarket plus current supplies, according to the Maclean Urban Study (a plan I think) will be enough until 2031. But hey, the Maclean Action Group - a misnomer if ever there was one - say otherwise. They must be the experts.

Accusing the council of a pretence with public consultation. WRONG.

The Maclean Inaction Group did not even bother to put in a deputation when this was discussed two weeks ago, as the Chamber of Commerce did. A deputation is the correct forum for pleading your case.

Accusing the council of no feedback. WRONG.

The council replies by many methods: email, letters, phone calls, deputations on site, and when they call a public meeting to discuss the visions for the year, six people turn up.

Accusing the council is ignoring Grafton. Well, let Grafton solve its own problems and get its own Grafton Inaction Group. We've got enough up here if they want to share.

Accusing the council of doing very little in Maclean in 10 years. WRONG.

They have paved through the CBD; built a footpath from past Gulmarrad School all the way into the High School; built the Sports Centre; built the new toilets which were needed and connected the sections of grass in a much more usable way; re-done the stormwater around the bowling club and up the hill; done the garden roundabout at the Post Office.

They are in planning for a million-dollar upgrade of McLachlan Park and Wherrett Park, both of which should start as soon as the weather clears and the Highland Gathering is finished.

Accusing the council of not upgrading the main street. WRONG.

When council did the paving, they completely revamped the outside parking lanes of the main street. The centre lanes I believe are the responsibility of the RMS. Maybe this has changed?

Accusing the council of taking away what little green space we have in Maclean. WRONG.

This new supermarket concept actually gives Maclean residents more green space than supermarket one. Keep in mind IGA has a valid DA on supermarket one. If they believe the Maclean Inaction Group, they may go back and build version one without any further discussion, but this will definitely put pressure on the people of Maclean compared to option two.

Accusing council of not maintaining the Civic Centre. WRONG.

I would like to offer the Maclean Inaction Group some vouchers to Specsavers, so they can catch a glimpse of the fairly new green Colorbond roof on the Civic Centre and the brand new kitchen which has been put in. Yes the ceiling needs painting. I'll lend them a brush.

Accusing the council of not calling a public meeting on the issue. WRONG.

They did. Years ago. The chamber has called three public meetings on the issue, but because the Maclean Inaction Group didn't get the response they wanted, the group said these meetings were rigged.

The Action Group has called four meetings - I believe meetings where if you try to stand up and discuss the issues rationally you get told to "shut up". They are meetings where there is no option to give a view opposing to theirs.

Accusing council of not replacing trees in town. WRONG.

They have replaced several trees in town, particularly in the main street. To say that Maclean only has two parks is a blatant lie. To say that people have to go to Yamba to play in a park completely ignores the beautiful children's playground next to the very expensive Sports Centre built by council with partly a grant. Specsavers again?

Perhaps the people driving to Yamba are actually going to a beach, visiting their aunt or dare I say visiting a really big supermarket?

Accusing council of overcharging on rates compared to Brisbane City. Well, sadly that's the maths behind the problem.

If you have three million ratepayers paying rather than 2600, then the base price will always be less. It's called economies of scale. Council is not crying poor over these upgrades to Maclean, as they have grants and the sale money quarantined to be spent only on Maclean projects. This is fact.

The Maclean Inaction Group concludes their letter with a threat to pull the council into line at the next election. That is their democratic right.

However if they do get elected, they will find that legal constraints on councillors are far more rigorous than even they have any understanding of.

Successful decisions of council are an amalgamation (dare I use that word!) of councillors, council management and staff and proposals put before them.

Sometimes as, in this case, they are tweaked to get the best result. They are not the result of bullying.

Denise Worrill¹

Maclean

1. As Maclean Chamber of Commerce Secretary in 2009 Ms. Worrill was vocal in her support for sale of part of the car park to IGA.

Disgraced former Nationals MP Steven Rhett Cansdell wants to enter politics once more?

On 2 December 2014 The Daily Examiner reported that sixty-four year old Steven Rhett Cansdell is considering standing at the March 2015 Clarence Valley Council by-election.

This would not be his first foray into politics and voters need to think long and hard if his name turns up on the by-election ballot paper.

Cansdell previously served on Grafton City Council over a ten-year period commencing in 1993. 

This council was notorious for living well beyond its means - by 1999 it had used $1.722 million of internal reserves to fund current operating costs and was still running in deficit in June 2003. It disappeared in the forced amalgamation which saw the creation of Clarence Valley Council in February 2004.

After leaving local government Cansdell then stood at the next state election and entered the NSW Parliament on 22 March 2003 as the Nationals MP for Clarence.

He successfully stood for re-election in 2007 and 2011.

On 4 May 2011 Cansdell became Parliamentary Secretary for Police under the Minister for Police and Emergency Services Liberal MLC Mike Gallacher.

He resigned from Parliament on 16 December 2011 in the midst of questions concerning a statutory declaration and allegations that he (rather than one of his staff) was driving a speeding car caught by a traffic camera.

Twenty-two weeks after the state election Clarence electorate voters had to participate in the subsequent by-election. Based on the NSW Electoral Commission’s cost projection for the 2011 state election, the total bill for the two Clarence ballots would be in the vicinity of $903,000.

Politically, Cansdell appeared to sink from public sight after that by-election.

However, the details of Mr. Cansdell’s admitted wrongdoing and the local reaction lived on.

Political cartoon in The Daily Examiner on 24 January 2012:

Letter to the Editor in The Daily Examiner on 14 March 2012:

The Sydney Morning Herald reported on 19 January 2013:

LESSONS FROM POLITICAL HOUDINI

The award for the most outstanding public escape act of recent times must surely go to the former member for Clarence, Steve Cansdell. 

You recall Cansdell: he was the former professional boxer and parliamentary secretary for police who became the O'Farrell government's first political casualty only months after it took office. 

The then 60-year-old quit Parliament after his admission that he had falsified a statutory declaration to claim a staff member was driving when his car was snapped by a speed camera.
Cansdell was trying to avoid losing his driver's licence. Despite the incident occurring back in September 2005, he fell on his sword in September 2011, amid a chorus of sympathy from his Nationals colleagues. 

Cansdell was "paying a very heavy price for a lapse of judgment six years ago", the leader of the Nationals and Deputy Premier, Andrew Stoner, said at the time. 

Only later did it emerge that shortly before Cansdell put his hands up, the staff member in question, Kath Palmer, had blown the whistle on the episode to the Independent Commission Against Corruption. 

So if Cansdell was not quite pushed - he claimed he quit to save the government and the party from embarrassment - he was very firmly nudged. 

Not only had Palmer alleged the statutory declaration fraud, she alleged that Cansdell had also rorted a parliamentary staffing allowance by wrongly claiming it for the period she worked on the 2010 campaign of a Nationals colleague, Kevin Hogan, who was contesting the federal seat of Page. 

And so began a very strange - many would say disturbing - series of events involving the ICAC, the police and the Speaker of the NSW Parliament that remain unresolved to this day.
In October last year, just over a year after Cansdell walked into Grafton police station with his lawyer to make his admission, police announced they had concluded their investigation into the statutory declaration matter. 

"NSW Police Force will not instigate criminal proceedings," they said in a statement. 

What had happened? The statement explained police from the Coffs-Clarence local area command had identified the woman who signed the declaration but that "she declined to be interviewed by officers". 

Futhermore, it added, the Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions had said it was "not satisfied there are reasonable prospects for conviction for a Commonwealth offence".
For the NSW police, that was the end of the matter. But they omitted a couple of key details. 

While it was true Palmer, through her lawyer, had refused to be formally interviewed, she had offered to make what is known as an "induced statement" - one given in return for indemnity from prosecution. 

According to Palmer's lawyer, Mark Spagnolo, the police had earlier made it known they intended to charge Palmer with perverting the course of justice for her role in the false statutory declaration. Any admission in an interview was likely to lead to her being charged. 

Police deny she was threatened with a charge but their decision to refuse her offer to supply an induced statement was rather ambitiously twisted to become Palmer "declined to be interviewed". 

Second, the Commonwealth DPP claimed it had been verballed. It said it had simply advised the NSW police that they were not satisfied it was a Commonwealth offence - a subtle but important difference. 

Things became even more intriguing when it emerged the ICAC had referred the allegation that Cansdell had rorted his parliamentary allowance to the Speaker of the NSW Parliament, Shelley Hancock, who was technically Palmer's employer. 

The ICAC referred the matter "for action as considered appropriate". But no action was taken for a year by Hancock, until Spagnolo released the letter publicly through Fairfax. 

After that Hancock, who is also the Liberal member for South Coast, promised that parliamentary officers would "review the material" sent by the ICAC. This included a spreadsheet containing the dates on which Palmer alleged Cansdell submitted claims for the allowance that differed from the days she worked. That was last October. 

What has happened since then? Hancock passed the matter to the executive manager of the Department of Parliamentary Services, Rob Stefanic, who responded that he was "unable to reach any conclusions regarding the veracity of the claims made by the former electorate officer". 

Stefanic added that because, in his opinion, the allegations were "of minor significance", that so much time had elapsed and that both Palmer and Cansdell had resigned, no further action should be taken "in the absence of more conclusive information". (Never mind that the allegations, if proven, are similar to those which saw two former Labor MPs, Angela D'Amore and Karyn Paluzzano, branded corrupt by ICAC.) 

When Hancock was asked if the Parliament would contact Palmer to request "more conclusive information", she said it would not. 

"As Ms Palmer did not make a complaint directly to the Parliament, the Parliament will not be contacting the complainant for further information." 

So, 18 months since Palmer made her official complaint, there the matter lies: a tangled mess of contradictory claims, dead ends and official inertia. 

Palmer is understood to be considering whether to pursue the matter with Parliament or drop it altogether to get on with her life. 

Spagnolo has called for an inquiry into the police handling of the matter. The silence has been deafening. 

Cansdell now says he has gone bankrupt. 

And, while there is no suggestion he is implicated, the man he is alleged to have helped out by fiddling his taxpayer-funded entitlements, Kevin Hogan, has won Nationals preselection to contest Page at this year's federal election. 

As a lesson in the frustrations of being a political whistleblower, it doesn't get much more instructive than that.

The Clarence Valley has been down this track before with dissembling state governments and naive mayors

The Daily Examiner 6 November 2014:

A "JOINT organisation" will pool the resources and bargaining power of Clarence Valley Regional Council with three surrounding local governments.

Mayor Richie Williamson was adamant the new structure was not an amalgamation and said Clarence Valley, Coffs Harbour, Bellingen and Nambucca councils would continue to exist as separate entities.

"In fact, it is the exact opposite. This is not about amalgamation in any form," he said.

"It's about a group of councils working in a regional framework."

A $5 million funding pool has been allocated to forming 15 "joint organisations" across New South Wales as part of the State Government's "Fit for the Future" local government reforms.

There have been suggestions the new organisations were a ploy to eventually replace "left-leaning" Regional Development Australia bodies in New South Wales.

Cr Williamson said he had not been told anything to that effect.

"We actually don't know much of substance about it yet. The make-up and its role are up for some strong discussion," he said.

"We need to ensure it's not simply adding another layer of bureaucracy….

In the 1990s local government councils in the Clarence Valley began cooperative management in areas of mutual interest through the Clarence Valley Local Government Committee, then a limited voluntary merger occurred in 2000 before the then NSW Labor Government forced wider amalgamation into the current Clarence Valley Council in 2004 with consequential diminution of good governance and transparency.

It is foolish to suppose that in the eyes of the current NSW Coalition Government the creation of a so called ‘joint organisation’ is not broadly comparable with the former Clarence Valley Local Government Committee (used to ‘soften’ local government opposition to merger proposals) and, therefore a possible precursor to the creation of a super council centred in one of the two largest population clusters, Coffs Harbour City or Tweed Shire.

It is equally foolish to believe that the $300,000 which this organisation would receive from the Baird Government would mitigate increased costs to Clarence Valley, Coffs Harbour, Bellingen and Nambucca councils flowing from the so-called ‘joint organisation' containing four local government areas with few historical or contemporary common interests.

The Baird Government makes it clear that once the $300,000 is spent no more state funding will be forthcoming. Direct and ongoing costs to be covered by member councils of a joint organisation include employment of an Executive Officer as well as accommodation and administrative costs, where not provided ‘in house’ by a member council.

Make no mistake, the joint organisation covering the four local government areas mentioned by Richie Williamson is highly likely to be just a pilot program for the final larger joint organisation which would start in the southern Great Lakes region and end at the NSW-Qld border – covering roughly half of the NSW coastline by 2016.

At its most basic the entire process is yet another scheme aimed at continuing cost shifting by the state government and, this map gives some indication of how rural and regional super council boundaries might look if the Liberal-Nationals Coalition gets its as yet unspoken wish:

Map in Fit for the Future: Joint Organisations, September 2014

The NSW Minister for Local Government and Nationals MLA for Bathurst who is progressing this scheme is the well-named Paul Toole.

Background

NSW Government, Office of Local Government, Fit for the Future: Joint Organisations, September 2014

Clarence Valley Council Deputy Mayor objects to wording of a council media release

This is the media release which sees recently elected Clarence Valley Council Deputy-Mayor Andrew Baker at odds with council management:

	Mayor: Richie Williamson General Manager: Scott Greensill                                                                   10 October 2014 Council moves to rationalise Grafton area depots Moves to consolidate the Clarence Valley Council’s five Grafton area work depots into one purpose-built site have taken their first formal step. The council has adopted conceptual master plans that would result in the eventual closure of depots in Grafton, South Grafton, Koolkhan, and its weeds and floodplain services depots and replaced with one facility near the intersection of Skinner Street (Rushforth Road) and Tyson Street in South Grafton – the site of the former sewerage treatment plant. General manager, Scott Greensill, said the five depots were a relic from council operations before amalgamation and consolidating them all on the one site would lead to more efficient service delivery and cost savings. The proposed Rushforth Road site has been endorsed by councillors, but will need to be rezoned and rehabilitated before work can start. A report will go to the November meetings of council. The council will apply to the NSW Government for the land to be rezone from SP2 – Infrastructure to SP2 – Depot and Public Administration Building. People will be able to make submissions on the proposal when it goes on public display. Release ends. For further information contact: David Bancroft        Communications Coordinator                    6643 0230
Clarence Valley Council Locked Bag 23 Grafton, NSW, 2460 Australia

This is Cr. Baker’s response: