Dual Roles: Banning Councillors as MP’s

Dual Roles: Banning  Councillors as MP’s

Dual Roles: Banning Councillors as MP’s

Bookmark and Share

by BourkeStreet
07/12/2011

The NSW Government has released a “Dual Roles: Councillors as Members of Parliament in NSW Discussion Paper”.

It’s open for submissions with closing date of 31 January 2012, email to: dlg@dlg.nsw.gov.au

The Question:

Should mayors and Councillors who are also Members of Parliament be eligible to stand for local government elections?

The Answer:

*when voters complain about narrowing our local roads to the local MP they get a reply from the Councillor’s Office. We have lost our democratic right of appeal to our local member as they are also Councillor.

*It’s a conflict of interested & not democratic to have local MP also on the local Council

*when they are MP & on Council voters are not sure who to complain to.

*The local MP’s role is a full time job. It’s not practical for MP’s to do two jobs.

*Being Mayor is a full time job. Not a part-time job

*Because a person has two jobs on Council & MP; there are other people who could be better MP as they can give their full time to the tasks in NSW Parliament

*It reduces local advocacy because voters can’t complain to their local MP on council issues as they are also on Council

*It’s inefficient as one person can’t be in two places at the same time. If there is a meeting of Parliament and meeting of Council what takes priority?

*Members of Parliament on their level of salary should have one job.

*Being on Council & MP has a significant impact reducing representative democracy in the electorate. Voters have no one to complain to about Council.

*The workload of being MP & on Council is not comparable to that of a Minister because they are conflicting roles. Local Council issues are different from State issues. The voters are not been well served by persons being MP & Councillors.

* It's not acceptable for a politician to pledge a full-time commitment to one job, mayor, and to make the same commitment to being an MP.

*Most other states don’t allow this double dipping, nor should NSW

Surely there are enough capable people in NSW to expect ''one person means one job'' in all spheres of government?


Report Post

Comments

Hetty posts

So as far as one person acting in the dual role as a Member of Parliament and or a Mayor as history will tell, they cannot serve wholly either their constituents and or their ratepayers with any degree of success. Clover Moore for example states as an aside that she has good staff, the staff are not ‘voted’ for by the ‘general public’ they are employed by either the Member of Parliament to undertake a job and or employed to serve the Mayor. (This of course is at the burdensome expense of both the taxpayers/constituents/ratepayers). They are not, repeat NOT employed by either the Member of Parliament’s constituents and or the ratepayers to take on the role of either a Member of Parliament and or a Mayor if that person decides to accept two roles rather than concentrating on one. Clearly, as pointed out by Clover Moore she relies heavily on the continuity of both jobs being kept together by her ‘staff’ not good enough and not good enough an answer. Indeed in many instances holding such high levels of office can produce serious conflicts of interest, and as such those that suffer are either the constituents and or ratepayers or in many instances both of the aforementioned. Hetty


Your email address is kept private and will not be shown publicly.


Notify me of follow-up comments via e-mail

By submitting your comment you agree to our community agreement / terms of use.


Feedback Form
Feedback Analytics