THE State Government's failure to release key backing documents justifying its merger plans came under attack at Tuesday's public inquiry.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
Middle Arm resident, former teacher and 'Yes Minister' fan, Steve Chapman criticised the government's decision not to fully release a KPMG report.
The consultancy estimated net savings and the areas from which they would be derived, but only the bare bones were released in the Minister's proposal.
Councils have questioned the figures' assumptions and tried unsuccessfully to secure the report through freedom of information. Mr Chapman too wants to know the calculations, assumptions and the modelling to arrive at the touted $2 billion saving across NSW.
"I encourage reform but prove to me that it will have financial and non-financial benefits," he said.
"...How can I make a decision as a ratepayer when I don't have access to the KPMG report? To be told that it's supposedly in confidence, I find to be not open government.
"I've been let down by my government and my local member in that area."
Mr Chapman urged delegate John Rayner to recommend the KPMPG report's public release.
He supported Goulburn Mulwaree's stance to stand alone because it had sought local input.
In contrast, the Minister had drawn an "arbitrary line" on a map, which was meaningless.
"To have the council's recommendation overridden shows an appalling lack of consultation," he said.
Goulburn Regional Enterprise president Peter Mullins said the proposal was "fundamentally flawed from every conceivable perspective."
Secondly, it was "misleading" in its language, which automatically raised "suspicions."
"When it purports to be consistent with existing policy, when it is actually flaunts it, is just astounding," he said.
"To say the proposal is fit for the future because of a revenue stream...with absolutely no substance, is just staggering.
"So it's absolutely understandable that no one can come to a clear view because the information is being withheld."
Mr Mullins said delegate John Rayner had little option but to say the case for merger had not been made.
Goulburn man Barry McDonald told the inquiry he saw little benefit in the proposal and speculated any estimated savings would disappear in a few years.
He said after Goulburn City and Mulwaree Shire amalgamated in 2004, for a time it had more staff than the two councils had before.
"How do you prevent this type of thing happening again?" he asked.
"...Last year I heard the Premier and Minister clearly state that if a council was classed as unfit then it should propose amalgamation with other councils.
"I believed that and so did the councillors and the rest of Goulburn Mulwaree from what I could see. But it seems standing alone is an option, as we've seen with unfit councils such as Upper Lachlan and Yass Valley."
What's the cost?
Mr McDonald said if the government proceeded with amalgamation, merging all of Palerang with Queanbeyan was the best outcome.
He argued Goulburn Mulwaree should be allowed to stand alone.
"If anything it is more fit than either of those two councils (Yass Valley and Upper Lachlan)," he said.
Another local, John Proctor, was damning of the reform process.
If local government was broken, as it stated, why wasn't the State making a realistic attempt to fix the problems, he asked.
"The current proposed solution is to fix two or more 'broken' councils by moving or altering the boundaries," he said.
"This will not and cannot provide the reforms needed to fix the problems associated with the existing council system."
He believed reform was needed, but there were other options, including joint organisations of councils and resource sharing, which would result in "significant" savings and efficiencies.
Mr Proctor maintained community of interest and representation were essential in rural areas.
Crookwell man Malcolm Green decried the State's "top down" approach that did not "genuinely engage with the critical mass."