📉 Disconnect and Discontent: When the Local Government Act Undermines What Ratepayers Really Want
- Dean Hurlston
- Apr 18
- 3 min read
By Council Watch
The recently released Municipal Monitor’s Report on Colac Otway Shire Council is intended to be a roadmap to better governance. But read closely, and the 70+ page report reveals something more troubling: a growing chasm between the expectations of Victoria’s Local Government Act (2020) and what the community actually wants from its elected representatives.
The report – while professionally crafted – repeatedly pushes for strict compliance with a narrow, bureaucratic definition of governance. But in doing so, it quietly dismisses the very thing that democracy is built on: the will of the people.
📣 The People Want Representation. The Act Demands Compliance.
Time and again, the Monitor scolds Colac Otway’s former councillors for doing exactly what their communities elected them to do – advocate for local needs.
“When interviewed, all seven Councillors (2020–2024) described their primary function as being to ‘meet community expectations’... This response involved reaching into operational matters to resolve the matter to the community member’s satisfaction.”
In the eyes of ratepayers, this is democracy in action: elected representatives championing real-world issues. But to the Monitor and the Local Government Act, it's “a failure of good governance.”
The report goes so far as to say councillors should not respond directly to complaints or requests – instead, directing residents through bureaucratic customer service portals.
📑 Strategic Governance vs. Local Outcomes
Under the Local Government Act, councillors are expected to be lofty strategists – authors of ten-year plans, budget visions and policy frameworks. But in reality, the average ratepayer wants something more grounded: working drains, maintained roads, community safety, and responsive leadership.
Yet the Monitor criticises councillors for questioning technical reports, seeking answers on capital works, or attempting to resolve local issues:
“Lengthy questioning and debating of specific technical details achieved little except to unnecessarily delay decisions… and undermine public confidence.”
If engaging in the detail of a controversial or costly decision is now considered bad governance, what exactly is left of local accountability?
⚖️ Silencing the People’s Voice
Perhaps the most worrying theme is how the Monitor frames community input. Councillors are repeatedly warned not to respond to pressure from “specific cohorts” or “interest groups” — even when these groups represent large sections of the voting public.
“Some Councillors appeared to prioritise the interests of part of the community… This behaviour is inconsistent with the requirements of the Local Government Act.”
In other words, unless a councillor is advocating for everyone equally (a philosophical impossibility), their behaviour is deemed inappropriate.
🛑 Councillors as the Enemy of Their Own Organisation?
The report reveals a culture where councillors who challenge executives or scrutinise operations are viewed as disruptive. Councillors are warned not to:
Critique the CEO
Engage staff directly
Revisit past decisions
Advocate too strongly for community events (e.g. Lake Colac safety concerns)
Appear publicly without mayoral permission
Yet these are the very actions the public associates with active, visible and accountable councillors. This approach suggests a local government system more interested in protecting bureaucracy than delivering for ratepayers.
👥 What the Public Really Wants
Victorians aren't asking their councillors to be corporate strategists. They want elected members who:
Answer the phone
Take up local issues
Challenge poor service
Question costs
Fix broken things
But instead, the Local Government Act, and now the monitors who enforce it, are pushing councils to behave more like detached boards of directors – inaccessible, procedural, and answerable only to their own framework.
🔍 A System at Odds with Itself
This report isn’t just about Colac Otway. It’s a warning sign that Victoria’s local government system has drifted too far from its grassroots purpose. When councillors are punished for being too connected to the community, we’ve lost sight of why we elect them in the first place.
Until governance reform aligns again with public expectations, distrust in councils – and in the State’s intervention mechanisms – will only deepen.
It’s time we stopped asking councillors to serve the Act and started letting them serve the people.
Council is a corrupt null and void entity. This stems back to a referendum held in I believe 1975 when the question was put out to the public "Do you want a local council", The MAJORITY VOTE WAS "NO". Suddenly the local council formed itself from nothing to collecting land rates, fines etc. I believe there needs to be a push to deactivate and decentralize this corrupt, money grabbing entity which took it upon itself to be formed
I would like to see all councillors stood down or sacked with no benefits or payouts of any description and we start again. Further to that I really don't see the need for council at all, to me they are extremely disruptive and disfunctional and an absolute waste of our money, they are way too consumed with their left woke ideoligy and are not slightly interested in doing anything for the people.
Good article, sums it up. I see another recent article calls for council amalgamations though, which would just see people have even less contact with councillors, and the councillors subject to more and more petty bureaucratic rules, afraid to speak out of turn for fear of being sued or otherwise 'disciplined' like infants. Two realities: The state is taking over local government; it is basically abolishing it without consulting us. Second one is our populations are too big, dense, and transient, for anyone to be able to represent us adequately. We need to allow our populations to fall back down to a natural level, unstimulated by mass migration, and for our councils to be smaller. I also agree with ano…
When the voice of the people is not heard, the people will speak louder and become distrustful of authority and their representatives. It is time that Council's listened to what people feel is value for money for their ever increasing rates. Not large paypackets and more executive staff, monitors they can't afford, but basic Services like roads, repairs and community projects. Lumping people into one basket is communism!
Strong journalism helps keep councils on their toes, but in recent years, most local papers are more interested in real estate advertising than reporting. Most young rural reporters today know little about journalism and act more like public relations people. I know, I once edited a newspaper in the Macedon Ranges shire known for its strong reporting.
That said, I must complain about the way my council in the same shire now distances itself from ratepayers. It took me more than two years to get council officers to reduce the gap between a 10m shed I am now building and a joint residential fence from 3.5m to 1.5m. And yet, it took my neighbour less than a week to get…