THE point of a referendum to include local government in the Constitution is to secure funding for local services and infrastructure ("Labor's bid for local control", 14/5). Far from a "takeover by Canberra", as claimed by Tim Wilson, a referendum would confirm the federal government's ability to directly fund local government.
Councils provide a full range of services that are only possible because councils work in partnership with the federal government. Without direct funding for local roads and community infrastructure, councils would not be able to provide all the services that our communities need.
Despite the suggestion that the provision of direct funding to councils has always been "a Labor dream to undermine the federation, bypass the states and control local government from Canberra", the arrangement was started by the Howard government in 2001. It was a rational response to the way federation works, where the Commonwealth collects more than 80 per cent of Australia's taxation revenue but is not directly responsible for local services and infrastructure.
This is about ensuring that federal funding continues to flow for vital services and facilities. Only a yes vote will allow this to happen.
Troy Pickard, vice-president, Australian Local Government Association, Joodalup, WA
CONSTITUTIONAL lawyer Greg Craven, Institute of Public Affairs policy director Tim Wilson, and former Liberal ministers Nick Minchin and Peter Reith are right in opposing the referendum on local councils being given constitutional recognition.
As a former local councillor with 25 years service, I also can't support spending $55 million on the September referendum.
Yes, it is centralising commonwealth power over another 2500 local politicians. I recall under the Whitlam Labor government how our mayor enjoyed attending regular meetings in Canberra on social welfare direct funding. The Prime Minister should change her mind on this referendum.
Tony Hall, St Ives, NSW
No comments:
Post a Comment