Castles surprised councils didn’t support Coast

First-time councillor Margot Castles said she was surprised when the NSW Local Government (LGNSW) conference failed to support a Central Coast Council motion about the State Government-imposed Performance Improvement Order.

Council’s motion asked that LGNSW call for the Minister of Local Government to withdraw Performance Improvement Orders (PIO) imposed on councils coming out of administration as a matter of urgency and to restore local democracy to those councils.

But the conference voted it down 60 to 40 per cent.

“I would have thought that fellow mayors and councillors would have been in support of this motion and the importance of an elected body to be able to make decisions and act without the impediment of a Performance Improvement Order,” Castles said.

Council’s PIO was imposed for one year and stops the councillors from making major decisions such as sacking the CEO without permission from the Office of Local Government.

Council has sought advice on its legality, arguing that it restrains the business of Council, some of which is directed by the Local Government Act

Castles was elected under the Labor banner in The Entrance ward at the September elections.

She said it was great to attend the conference and be among so many newly-elected councillors.

Asked about her voting on the 110 motions debated, Castles mentioned two that she voted yes for.

Motion 97, penned by Canterbury Bankstown Council, called for a First Nations Voice to NSW Parliament which was adopted.

It now becomes policy that LGNSW will lobby the State Government to commit to the state-based implementation of the Uluru Statement from the Heart – Voice, Treaty and Truth – by implementing the First Nations Voice to NSW Parliament.

The second motion calling for Trans and Gender Diverse Inclusion lost after heated debate about changerooms.

Randwick City Council wanted the conference to lobby the NSW Government to affirm that transgender and gender diverse people are entitled to full inclusion in access to council facilities, including council-run gyms, libraries and toilets, and in participation in community level sports.

The motion went on to ask the State Government to advise all local councils to: ensure gender-neutral bathrooms are available in council owned/maintained facilities including parks, libraries and recreational centres; allow people to determine their gender marker on council identity documents such as gym or library cards; and publicly affirm trans and gender diverse people’s participation in community and local level sporting and recreation clubs as their identified gender.

A Yass councillor said the motion showed the great divide between councils; at Yass, there was only one changeroom.

“Our women’s footy team has to wait for the blokes to change before they can use the changeroom,” she said.

Debate became quite heated and eventually the motion was rejected 44 to 56 per cent.

Castles said the conference imparted some great information from speakers.

These included information about the Local Government Information Unit (LGiU) from the UK and another one about cyber security and local government.

“The speaker talked about LGiU’s Local Government Democracy Centre and the work they are doing on financial sustainability and making the local government sector more resilient,” Castles said.

She said the talk about cyber security was fascinating.

“Who knew it was possible to get excited about cyber security,” Castles said.

All attending councillors have been asked to provide feedback on their experience at the conference.

Merilyn Vale

1 Comment on "Castles surprised councils didn’t support Coast"

  1. Funny, I don’t remember these other two issues (Treaty and Trans-gender Inclusion) being listed anywhere in the lead-up to the local council elections and our prospective councillor’s views on same? I also don’t remember these two questions being voted on by Council before councillor Castle attended the conference to take with her? Makes you wonder if Councillor Castle’s responses/votes on these two issues are her own personal views instead of those of the elected Council on behalf of the ratepayers she is representing.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published.


*