Republic of Moreland

June 2, 2007

Moreland Council “targets populism over longer term responsibility”

The Age reports that climate change will soon see expensive bayside real estate under water (I wonder where Andrew Bolt lives?). Meanwhile, in Moreland we’re sticking our heads in the sand. So say the Greens Councillors, Jo Connellan and Andrea Sharam, in a media release.

They say the Moreland City Council is not putting its money where its mouth is, and keeping rates low at the expense of its stated climate change targets:

“A key reason that the 2007/08 Council budget represents a slipping backwards from financial sustainability is that Council wishes to retain the rate rise at 6.5%.

The only responsible way to do that, and maintain the trends of the five year plan (ie to keep moving to a sustainable position), is to either cut service, or alternately increase rates to 8.5 –9%. By retaining all services and not ensuring adequate income (ie sufficient rates), the only option is to borrow from the future. The impact of this (as illustrated in the draft budget papers) is as follows.”

I for one am happy for rates to rise a little to meet climate change targets. But other steps can be taken, too, such as stopping wasting money on useless expensive things like the street steles. The authors continue:

“Keeping rates as low as possible is always popular. But there is also a level of responsibility that needs to exercised by a Council. The community rely [sic] on Council to make the best decision it can in keeping rates at a reasonable level AND at maintaining a financially sustainable level of operating over the longer term. The proposed budget not only reduces financial sustainability, it constrains future Council’s options. This occurs because there will be very limited capacity to deal with emergencies or to implement some of it’s [sic] capital intensive plans (eg renewing aquatic centres) as rates income in these future years will be needed to re-fill the cash reserves.

The proposed 2007/08 budget targets populism over longer term responsibility. It postpones the hard and unpopular decisions to the next Council. It should be rejected. It is in the best interests of the community to have a slighter higher rate rise in the current year rather than a significantly higher one in the first year or so of the next Council.”

What say you? Would you pay higher rates or rents to meet climate change goals? What cuts in services would you tolerate to meet these goals?



  1. They can raise my rates as long as I have proof the money is going towards real climate change-tackling projects, like green roofs, rainwater harvesting, solar power for council buildings or other such things.

    As for trims and cuts, those steles sure spring to mind first, as you note, GoTA. But I sure know how the council can earn extra cash in a flash to put towards greening projects: just enforce some common-sense parking regulations around our neighbourhood, for starters. Not only does private vehicle use need to be discouraged, some of the “motoring community” around here are just flat-out selfish to the point of being anti-social.

    Warning to all such malakas: the next one who parks across the footpath, I’m walking across your damn bonnet.

    Comment by Bane of Malakas — June 3, 2007 @ 1:34 pm | Reply

  2. since you mention the RWDBeastyBolt … I heard him say this Sunday morning on The Insiders ABCTV that “the benefits from climate policy will not be worth the expense of them” and he scoffed at the idea of Luna Park becoming Aqua Park; so I can only hope his weekender is at Safety Beach.

    I learned a surprising (to me) fact this week:
    the production of cement/concrete makes more pollution than all commercial airline travel.*sigh*

    Comment by Bwca — June 3, 2007 @ 8:49 pm | Reply

  3. Hello Bwca, I’m trying to work out what Bwca means. Brunswick West Community Action?

    Comment by Girl on The Avenue — June 4, 2007 @ 12:27 am | Reply

  4. Bane: even worse som P-plater parked in front of my rubbish bin last week and the council didn’t collect it! WE’RE OVER-FLOWING HERE CAPTAIN!

    Comment by Marty — June 4, 2007 @ 1:36 pm | Reply

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

Create a free website or blog at

%d bloggers like this: