This post is arguably high falutin’ – some might say esoteric and hence not for everyone. However, we believe that it touches on the crucial issues which surround governance at Glen Eira. ‘Governance’ is a much bandied about word. It lends itself to all sorts of restrictions as well as opportunities – depending on what the user wishes to emphasise. We highlight below extracts from a recent publication into the various forms of governance at the local council level and ask readers to contemplate the ostensibly narrow nature of ‘governance’ as practised in our council. The discussion paper identifies 3 distinct forms of governance – corporate, democratic and community. We suggest that the latter two incarnations are conspicuous by their absence in Glen Eira!
5.2 Governance as democratic governance
Building on the decision making elements of the definition of governance outlined above, the term democratic governance is used to refer to deepening democratic engagement through the participation of citizens in the processes of governance with the state. The Victorian Good Governance Guide acknowledges the link between governance and democracy:
Relevant legislation is important in recognising and understanding the legal framework within which local government operates. However it is only one part of the guiding principles and issues that support good governance. Good governance must also have an ethical base. Democracy depends on generating and maintaining a strong foundation of trust between the community and those who govern. The need for transparency in governing processes underlies this trust, as does the honesty and integrity of the elected representatives and the administration (Exiter, R and the Good Governance Advisory Group, 2004: p 40).
The Victorian council, Surf Coast Shire, exemplifies this broader understanding of governance in their governance manual: “The Surf Shire Council is committed to promoting the wellbeing of the Shire’s residents and views good governance as the key to democracy at work. Good governance…also includes the way that local governments engage with their communities’ (Surf Coast Shire, 2009: 3).
Public discourse about democratic governance and its importance was heightened in Victoria following the period of local government amalgamations in the 1990’s and legislative requirements for compulsive competitive tendering of council services. Brian Galligan (University of Melbourne) explores democratic governance in the context of these reforms which were undertaken for efficiency purposes:
Even if we understand local government as enabler rather than provider of services, the distinction between local government as a system for ensuring efficient service provision and local government as a system of democratic governance remains a crucial one. That is because local government as enabler still has to determine the range and standards of services that its community requires (Galligan,1998:204).
The ‘Just Communities’ action research conducted with councils across Australia between 2006 and 2008, examined the practice of democratic governance by councils (Just Communities, 2010). The research report concluded that local government needs to find the right blend of community engagement, governance and decision-making processes, and management frameworks, to strengthen local democracy and advance community wellbeing. This project sought to define those interdependencies in what became the ‘GEM’ relationship model:
G – Democratic governance: Where leadership and decision-making by elected Councillors is based on a sound appreciation of community issues and needs and a commitment to effective community engagement in the political process.
E – Civic engagement: Where councils employ effective techniques to enable active citizens to influence the formulation and implementation of public policies that affect their daily lives.
M – Organisation management: Where public value management policies and practices are embedded in the workplace culture, acknowledge citizen participation rights and ensure that the outcomes of community engagement inform decision-making.
Glen Eira Debates 
November 27, 2011 at 6:28 PM
The GEM principles outlined in the post have no place in Glen Eira simply because they threaten the existing power structures of Newton. Can you imagine any scenario where residents actually get a meaningful say in the political process? Or where “active citizens” are appreciated and encouraged rather than vilified? Or heaven help us, residents really and truly have some “influence” on policy and implementation? For Newton and the gang what matters is secrecy, community exclusion, and preset agendas.
November 27, 2011 at 10:28 PM
No, what matter is control.
control = power = prestige = ego = Newton = dysfunction
November 27, 2011 at 10:54 PM
Lets just take in the CEO re-appointment and the scandalous recent heritage issue and apply the above to the antics of Council. Even if you give Council the benefit of every doubt (and there are so many that that in itself raises serious questions) you still come up with a score of abysmal.
November 27, 2011 at 11:12 PM
I’ve been re-reading the Councillor Code of Conduct and came across Section 4.7 – “Councillors have a duty to be as transparent as possible about their
decisions and actions, giving reasons for decision and restricting
information only when the wider public interest clearly demands.” It would be really enlightening to hear Esakoff’s, Hyams’ and Lipshutz’s reasons for voting against a petition at the last council meeting. This joint action spelt out in spades the failures of this council to adhere to the code of conduct and to honour the dictums of good governance.
November 28, 2011 at 12:14 AM
You’ve forgotten to add Lobo to this list. When’s the last time he said a word about any of his votes?
November 28, 2011 at 6:33 PM
why woulod he ?… he would be scared to say the wrong thing. As it is he has to vote only with a certain block of councillors or they re-count the votes and he votes as the gang members require. Take note of the two or three well meaning elected councillors there have been on council over the last decade and one could assume they all decided this power group was not worth disagreeing with so they gracefully retired one by one.