❓ Minister Stephens clarifies his discussion with the Local Government Advisory Board regarding ward representation reviews, emphasizing a 10% tolerance for boundary variations and consideration of 'one vote, one value' principle, while denying direct instruction.
AnsweredQoN 701Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
Has the minister directed or instructed the Local Government Advisory Board to ensure that the principle of one vote, one value is a priority when it is reviewing ward representation of local government authorities as required under the Local Government Act? Hon TOM STEPHENS
AnswerView source ↗
It would be a bit strong to say that I have directed anybody. I have discussed the matter with Mr Charlie Gregorini, who provides the advisory board services under this statute, and his officer. I have had only one discussion with him, and I had it on the day that I was subsequently asked about this matter by the Leader of the Opposition. I forget the exact date, but it was whatever day Hon Norman Moore asked me this question. I had the discussion just a few hours before with Mr Charlie Gregorini and Mr Duncan Watson, I think it was. They raised the issue of the review being undertaken to examine council boundaries, and were looking for some indication of whether I had any desire to change the policy direction in which they were proceeding. They were probably acting on a review that had been discussed with my predecessor in this portfolio. They indicated that they were moving in the direction of 10 per cent tolerance with regard to boundaries. I thought that plus or minus 10 per cent would be a reasonable response to the boundaries of wards, and indicated that they might take that on board in the consideration of these issues. I also indicated that if there were exceptional circumstances that needed to be drawn to my attention in the review of ward boundaries, that should be done as they considered and deliberated on these issues. It would be a bit rich to say that that constituted instruction; however, I have had a discussion with them. If I had to instruct them, it would be that when conducting the review they should take on board the principle of one vote, one value, put a cross at the yardstick of plus or minus 10 per cent, and to bring to my attention any exceptional circumstances. I have not instructed them yet but if I am asked to, that is what I would say.
Hon TOM STEPHENS replied: It would be a bit strong to say that I have directed anybody. I have discussed the matter with Mr Charlie Gregorini, who provides the advisory board services under this statute, and his officer. I have had only one discussion with him, and I had it on the day that I was subsequently asked about this matter by the Leader of the Opposition. I forget the exact date, but it was whatever day Hon Norman Moore asked me this question. I had the discussion just a few hours before with Mr Charlie Gregorini and Mr Duncan Watson, I think it was. They raised the issue of the review being undertaken to examine council boundaries, and were looking for some indication of whether I had any desire to change the policy direction in which they were proceeding. They were probably acting on a review that had been discussed with my predecessor in this portfolio. They indicated that they were moving in the direction of 10 per cent tolerance with regard to boundaries. I thought that plus or minus 10 per cent would be a reasonable response to the boundaries of wards, and indicated that they might take that on board in the consideration of these issues. I also indicated that if there were exceptional circumstances that needed to be drawn to my attention in the review of ward boundaries, that should be done as they considered and deliberated on these issues. It would be a bit rich to say that that constituted instruction; however, I have had a discussion with them. If I had to instruct them, it would be that when conducting the review they should take on board the principle of one vote, one value, put a cross at the yardstick of plus or minus 10 per cent, and to bring to my attention any exceptional circumstances. I have not instructed them yet but if I am asked to, that is what I would say.
It would be a bit strong to say that I have directed anybody. I have discussed the matter with Mr Charlie Gregorini, who provides the advisory board services under this statute, and his officer. I have had only one discussion with him, and I had it on the day that I was subsequently asked about this matter by the Leader of the Opposition. I forget the exact date, but it was whatever day Hon Norman Moore asked me this question. I had the discussion just a few hours before with Mr Charlie Gregorini and Mr Duncan Watson, I think it was. They raised the issue of the review being undertaken to examine council boundaries, and were looking for some indication of whether I had any desire to change the policy direction in which they were proceeding. They were probably acting on a review that had been discussed with my predecessor in this portfolio. They indicated that they were moving in the direction of 10 per cent tolerance with regard to boundaries. I thought that plus or minus 10 per cent would be a reasonable response to the boundaries of wards, and indicated that they might take that on board in the consideration of these issues. I also indicated that if there were exceptional circumstances that needed to be drawn to my attention in the review of ward boundaries, that should be done as they considered and deliberated on these issues. It would be a bit rich to say that that constituted instruction; however, I have had a discussion with them. If I had to instruct them, it would be that when conducting the review they should take on board the principle of one vote, one value, put a cross at the yardstick of plus or minus 10 per cent, and to bring to my attention any exceptional circumstances. I have not instructed them yet but if I am asked to, that is what I would say.
Hon TOM STEPHENS replied: It would be a bit strong to say that I have directed anybody. I have discussed the matter with Mr Charlie Gregorini, who provides the advisory board services under this statute, and his officer. I have had only one discussion with him, and I had it on the day that I was subsequently asked about this matter by the Leader of the Opposition. I forget the exact date, but it was whatever day Hon Norman Moore asked me this question. I had the discussion just a few hours before with Mr Charlie Gregorini and Mr Duncan Watson, I think it was. They raised the issue of the review being undertaken to examine council boundaries, and were looking for some indication of whether I had any desire to change the policy direction in which they were proceeding. They were probably acting on a review that had been discussed with my predecessor in this portfolio. They indicated that they were moving in the direction of 10 per cent tolerance with regard to boundaries. I thought that plus or minus 10 per cent would be a reasonable response to the boundaries of wards, and indicated that they might take that on board in the consideration of these issues. I also indicated that if there were exceptional circumstances that needed to be drawn to my attention in the review of ward boundaries, that should be done as they considered and deliberated on these issues. It would be a bit rich to say that that constituted instruction; however, I have had a discussion with them. If I had to instruct them, it would be that when conducting the review they should take on board the principle of one vote, one value, put a cross at the yardstick of plus or minus 10 per cent, and to bring to my attention any exceptional circumstances. I have not instructed them yet but if I am asked to, that is what I would say.
It would be a bit strong to say that I have directed anybody. I have discussed the matter with Mr Charlie Gregorini, who provides the advisory board services under this statute, and his officer. I have had only one discussion with him, and I had it on the day that I was subsequently asked about this matter by the Leader of the Opposition. I forget the exact date, but it was whatever day Hon Norman Moore asked me this question. I had the discussion just a few hours before with Mr Charlie Gregorini and Mr Duncan Watson, I think it was. They raised the issue of the review being undertaken to examine council boundaries, and were looking for some indication of whether I had any desire to change the policy direction in which they were proceeding. They were probably acting on a review that had been discussed with my predecessor in this portfolio. They indicated that they were moving in the direction of 10 per cent tolerance with regard to boundaries. I thought that plus or minus 10 per cent would be a reasonable response to the boundaries of wards, and indicated that they might take that on board in the consideration of these issues. I also indicated that if there were exceptional circumstances that needed to be drawn to my attention in the review of ward boundaries, that should be done as they considered and deliberated on these issues. It would be a bit rich to say that that constituted instruction; however, I have had a discussion with them. If I had to instruct them, it would be that when conducting the review they should take on board the principle of one vote, one value, put a cross at the yardstick of plus or minus 10 per cent, and to bring to my attention any exceptional circumstances. I have not instructed them yet but if I am asked to, that is what I would say.
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.