❓ Question regarding the Minister's stance on 'one vote, one value' principle in local government boundary determinations. The Minister clarifies his advice to the Local Government Advisory Board, emphasizing a +/- 10% variance for ward boundaries with consideration for exceptional circumstances.
AnsweredQoN 408Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
The minister’s answer was a little difficult to understand in the context of the question. Can the minister confirm that he has advised the Local Government Advisory Board that he will not accept any local government boundaries that do not apply to the principle of one vote, one value? Hon TOM STEPHENS
AnswerView source ↗
As far as I know, I have not advised the board in exactly those terms, but I had a conversation with the Local Government Advisory Board today. That is why I was not at a meeting with my colleagues earlier this afternoon. I have the view, which has now been relayed at least orally - not in writing - that the plus or minus 10 per cent for ward boundaries is appropriate. I have suggested that if there were exceptional circumstances they should be considered, but by and large local government boundaries plus or minus 10 per cent are an approximate goal that should be the basis of the review and recommendations by the board to me. That is the ideal towards which they should move. If there is some particular reason why a board cannot, it should put up the argument as to why it cannot.
Hon TOM STEPHENS replied: As far as I know, I have not advised the board in exactly those terms, but I had a conversation with the Local Government Advisory Board today. That is why I was not at a meeting with my colleagues earlier this afternoon. I have the view, which has now been relayed at least orally - not in writing - that the plus or minus 10 per cent for ward boundaries is appropriate. I have suggested that if there were exceptional circumstances they should be considered, but by and large local government boundaries plus or minus 10 per cent are an approximate goal that should be the basis of the review and recommendations by the board to me. That is the ideal towards which they should move. If there is some particular reason why a board cannot, it should put up the argument as to why it cannot.
As far as I know, I have not advised the board in exactly those terms, but I had a conversation with the Local Government Advisory Board today. That is why I was not at a meeting with my colleagues earlier this afternoon. I have the view, which has now been relayed at least orally - not in writing - that the plus or minus 10 per cent for ward boundaries is appropriate. I have suggested that if there were exceptional circumstances they should be considered, but by and large local government boundaries plus or minus 10 per cent are an approximate goal that should be the basis of the review and recommendations by the board to me. That is the ideal towards which they should move. If there is some particular reason why a board cannot, it should put up the argument as to why it cannot.
Hon TOM STEPHENS replied: As far as I know, I have not advised the board in exactly those terms, but I had a conversation with the Local Government Advisory Board today. That is why I was not at a meeting with my colleagues earlier this afternoon. I have the view, which has now been relayed at least orally - not in writing - that the plus or minus 10 per cent for ward boundaries is appropriate. I have suggested that if there were exceptional circumstances they should be considered, but by and large local government boundaries plus or minus 10 per cent are an approximate goal that should be the basis of the review and recommendations by the board to me. That is the ideal towards which they should move. If there is some particular reason why a board cannot, it should put up the argument as to why it cannot.
As far as I know, I have not advised the board in exactly those terms, but I had a conversation with the Local Government Advisory Board today. That is why I was not at a meeting with my colleagues earlier this afternoon. I have the view, which has now been relayed at least orally - not in writing - that the plus or minus 10 per cent for ward boundaries is appropriate. I have suggested that if there were exceptional circumstances they should be considered, but by and large local government boundaries plus or minus 10 per cent are an approximate goal that should be the basis of the review and recommendations by the board to me. That is the ideal towards which they should move. If there is some particular reason why a board cannot, it should put up the argument as to why it cannot.
Explore WA Government Data
Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.
Explore more
Government Gazette
Appointments, regulatory notices, planning changes.
Hansard
Debates, questions, speeches and sentiment.
Tabled Papers
Reports and documents tabled in Parliament.
Committees
Committee profiles and recent reports.
Regulations
Subsidiary legislation with filters and summaries.
Bills
Proposed laws and parliamentary progress.
Acts
Current WA legislation and summaries.
Explanatory Memoranda
Bills with EMs (text/PDF) available.
Members
MP profiles, party breakdown and rankings.
Pollie Rankings
Data-driven rankings across 19 categories.
Amendment Chains
Track how schemes and regulations evolve over time.