The message was clear, don’t mess with our portfolios. But are councillors acting like ministers?
Southern Downs Regional Council CEO Rachel Brophy recommended amendments to curtail the scope of councillors portfolios in the SDRC council meeting last week but most councillors were not in favour of the proposed changes. The amendments appear to curtail councillors stepping on staff’s turf – and toes – and to keep councillors from overreach and dabbling in state politics.
Portfolios, Mayor Melissa Hamilton explained to the Town & Country Journal, are around “strategic vision”.
“The opportunity for councillors is to embrace strategic roles and not get into operational matters” especially since much of the public don’t understand “what you can and can’t do as a councillor.”
The mayor elaborated.
“Councillors cannot be decision makers because council makes decisions as a whole. Councillors cannot give direction to a council staff member, unlike ministers, they have a very different legislative scenario.
The terminology of the recommendations presented in chambers last week were to “achieve better alignment with similar areas of responsibility and with Council’s Executive Leadership team; and reflect that all Councillors are engaged in those topics that are core Council business such as the budget and planning so as to ensure the good management of Council business”.
When the motion to amend the portfolios was raised, a few silent beats stretched out before the deputy mayor raised her hand to move the motion.
“I’m happy to speak to that motion,” Deputy Mayor Sheryl Windle said. “as people are very aware, during the election time, particularly, they were really keen to see us all have portfolios and we have achieved that. We’re just looking to make some changes to streamline some things and disconnect from the operational side of things. And a lot of those portfolios did have a lot of operational things in there that we really didn’t need to get down to.”
Those “operational things” apparently caused a flurry of “asking questions and sending emails” through different channels in either an untidy or unsatisfactory fashion or both. Mayor Hamilton later told the paper that there were concerns about over the amount of time council staff were being asked to work on portfolio matters.
“I’m all in favour of change at any time if it’s going to make things better for the organisation and for the councillors”, Cr Windle concluded.
Cr Harslett wasn’t so sure. She agreed that if change is really required, then fine, but “I think this is something that we as a whole group of nine councillors” should have some discussion over. “I don’t think we’ve had that discussion as a group and I would prefer to keep it as it is and have that discussion before we move to make changes that I don’t believe have been fully thought through.”
Cr Ross Bartley opined that the whole portfolio scheme is a mistake.
“I really wonder if we have really demonstrated a need for portfolios; it might be a case of déjà vu. It was tried in a previous council and they gave up on them after some difficulties again going into operational – causing a few problems. It was deemed that some people were trying to be the minister of their portfolios, which was unfortunate, and therefore they were dropped.”
Cr Bartley expressed that the portfolio areas are “more of a state government measure” “so we adopt an advocacy role of so-called portfolio holders rather than operational or getting involved in our own local councils. If you look a lot of the mental health, we advocate that, absolutely, but we don’t get involved, that’s a state government issue. But we can certainly lobby state government to provide better services in that area, that’s our role as a council, but we do not provide. So, I think we’ve got to delineate what is state government's responsibility and what is council’s core business to a large degree.”
“Thank you Cr Bartley,” the Mayor murmured.
Cr Joel Richters is “not particularly satisfied with the proposed changes, either”. He’s happy to “listen to the conversation, and I think that’s right we haven’t had that conversation in depth yet, so I’m not supportive of” the motion.
The Town & Country Journal will continue to cover any changes to councillors’ portfolios.
Cr Cynthia McDonald put everyone at ease by putting up a procedural motion to lay the proposed amendments to portfolios on the table after reading the “mood of the room”. She suggested a councillor information session “so we can come to an agreement.”
Cr McDonald’s motion passed with Cr Bartley and Pidgeon voting against it.
