Analysis – Carol Altmann

Is the Warrnambool City Council in favour of same sex marriage?

I realised during a recent visit to California – one of 37 US states to have legal same sex marriage – that I didn’t know the answer and that it was time to find out.

While some people may argue that taking a stand on marriage equality is not a local council issue, it most certainly is, because it reflects what sort of community we are and what sort of community we wish to live in.

In just the same way that many councils are now declaring their positions on family violence, racism, asylum seekers and climate change – all, big-ticket, federal issues with local implications – so too are they choosing to stand up in support of same-sex marriage as part of social justice and equality.

It is all about sending a message, a clear and unequivocal message, that we are tolerant, open-hearted and accepting of a diverse community and in a highly masculine, regional city like Warrnambool, this is even more important, because growing up gay in such an environment can be tough – even in 2015.

Byron Shire Mayor Simon Richardson last year sent a marriage equality proclamation to every council around Australia and has since been watching the results flow in.

I was surprised to learn that, perhaps prompted by Mayor Richardson, more than a dozen councils around Australia have since declared their support for marriage equality, including the unanimous vote by Hobart City Council in April.

Other councils to express their support thus far include Albury, Glen Eira, Greater Geelong- Surf Coast, Tenterfield, Byron Shire, Sydney, Leichardt and Port Douglas, while Launceston has embarrassed itself by going in the other direction and voting 8-3 against.

I say embarrassed itself because there is no doubt the wave of support for marriage equality among the majority of Australians (72% in a 2014 poll) will soon see Australia go where so many countries have gone before (21 at the most recent count) by legalising marriage between same sex partners.

Unfortunately our local politicians are embarrassing themselves too, with Wannon MP Dan Tehan, South-West coast MP Dr Denis Napthine and Victorian Upper House MP James Purcell all opposed to marriage equality.

Indeed some of the statements by our political representatives have been nothing short of extraordinary.

Take this example from Mr Tehan in 2010: “This isn’t a matter of discrimination of same-sex couples, this is about the union of marriage which is traditionally between a man and a woman and I believe it should stay like that into the future.”

Boy, that certainly sounds like discrimination to me.

And this from Mr Purcell, also in 2010: “I think same-sex relationships are quite legitimate – what people want to do is their business – but marriage is an institution that’s been around for thousands of years and I don’t think we need to change it.”

Quite legitimate? What people want to do is their business? Surely this is not a discussion on whether it is okay to be gay – god forbid we have to roll back the debate that far – but about equality and human rights.

Most of our Warrnambool City councillors, I am delighted to say, completely agree.

Bluestone contacted each of the councillors to ask the simple question: “Do you support gay marriage?” and five out of the seven chose to respond. Those that didn’t, disappointingly, were Cr Peter Hulin and Cr Rob Askew.

The remaining five, however, were all happy to express their support and here are their written responses:

Mayor Michael Neoh:  “I do not have any issue with consensual marriage between any two adults. This is my personal opinion.”

Cr Brian Kelson: “I don’t believe this should be a issue for local council, personally I believe in equality, but it will be a Federal decision that will make it a reality.”

Cr Jacinta Ermacora: “I’m sure you know already, but just confirming I support marriage equality. No government regulated institution should discriminate against any one in our society. What the religions believe is their business and will not be impacted by Bill (Shorten) and Tanya’s (Plibersek’s) legislation.”

Cr Peter Sycopoulis: “I have always tried to live a life where I treat others with equality, fairness and respect, irrespective of race, religion or even sexual orientation. I see no reason why I should treat the subject of gay marriage any differently. I support the concept of an individual’s right to choose.

“In particular, I find it quite unfair that same sex couples are not afforded the same legal rights and protection as others. The legal recognition of same-sex marriage would not only give all couples the same legal rights and protection but also the same legal responsibilities to their partner and family.”

Cr Kylie Gaston: “I have been a supporter of same sex marriage for years. I have many gay friends and have never been able to understand the logic that I had the right to marry and they did not. This is about ending discrimination.  So as a nation I believe we should remove discrimination against same sex de facto couples in federal legislation as an absolute priority so that all citizens of Australia will have equal rights on this matter.

“I find it frustrating and sad that we are now lagging behind many other countries over this matter especially when polling is indicating a clear majority of Australians support SSM. I’m looking forward to a couple of weddings of some very close friends in the not too far distant future!”

The question now is which councillor will take the next step and table a motion – or even Mayor Richardson’s proclamation – that the Warrnambool City Council declares its support for marriage equality?

This is as an opportunity for the council to not only add its voice to an important national discussion, but to remind every citizen of Warrnambool – regardless of gender, race or sexuality – that they are all equal.

[box]You can visit The Australian Marriage Equality website here.[/box]

[button link=”http://the-terrier.com.au/subscribe-2/” type=”icon” icon=”heart” newwindow=”yes”]Bluestone needs at least 500 subscribers in 2015. If you wish to support independent media, please click here to become one.[/button]

Find more Analysis here…

 

Rates, races and rubbery figures

Why doesn’t Warrnambool have a major art prize?

Once proud Rowitta is now an abandoned ship

W’bool City Council’s big shed shemozzle

OPINION

[dropcap style=”font-size: 60px; color:#A02F2F;”] A [/dropcap] compulsory traders levy to fund Commerce Warrnambool is poised for defeat on the back of a successful grassroots campaign to knock the idea on the head.

The votes have been collated by the Warrnambool City Council, and Bluestone understands that of the 1330 traders that would be affected by the levy, 688 – or 51.7% – took the time and effort to vote “no”.

As with any vote, not everyone filled the form out absolutely correctly, or on time, and after taking such things into account, the “no” vote settles at 49.2%.

While this brings the objections just short of an absolute majority, it would be a very brave (or foolish?) council to fly in the face of such strong opposition.

As such, it is not surprising that council staff have recommended that the levy proposal be dropped when the council meets next Monday (1/12) to vote on the issue.

In addition to a trader vote, anybody could put in a submission either for or against the levy – 36 people put in submissions against the proposal, while only five wrote in support.

[dropcap style=”font-size: 60px; color:#A02F2F;”] T [/dropcap]his is nothing short of a crushing defeat for the levy and a remarkable result for the Facebook-based Warrnambool Traders Action Group which marshalled the “no” vote.

Let’s not forget that the weird voting system applied by the Local Government Act meant that only traders who objected to the levy had to physically vote.

Those who didn’t respond were seen as being in support of the idea, even if, for example, they were interstate, sick, or may have been too busy or otherwise distracted by life events to put pen to paper.

Given this, 688 objections and 36 submissions against the levy is a huge show of dissatisfaction and an indication of how angry most traders are that the idea made it this far.

Because let’s be frank, the proposal never got off to a good start.

[dropcap style=”font-size: 60px; color:#A02F2F;”] B [/dropcap]luestone readers will recall that most traders only discovered the full extent of the levy after reading our story back in May, when it was revealed that Commerce Warrnambool wanted to raise $600,000 a year by applying a compulsory levy to all traders, including those in the industrial estate.

The levy would be in place for five years and rise by 5 per cent a year, with Commerce Warrnambool in charge of deciding how the money would be spent on promoting the city, encouraging people to shop local and lobbying on behalf of business.

Nobody doubts that local business needs a serious boost, but asking them to fund a newly formed body that had yet to demonstrate its capabilities in marketing, promotion or advocacy was ambitious, at best, and naive at worst.

After a trader backlash, led by the Warrnambool Traders Action Group, the levy total was halved to $300,000 a year and capped at $300 a year per business.

Despite this, the proposal failed to ignite any excitement and the revised Commerce Warrnambool business plan contained very little that had not been tried before, such as shop local campaigns, Christmas decorations and car raffles.

The talk around town – and we heard it everywhere we visited – was not how great the levy idea was, but how to get rid of it.

[dropcap style=”font-size: 60px; color:#A02F2F;”] G[/dropcap]iven the council has since received only five written submissions in favour of the levy, it appears that even the 12 members on the Commerce Warrnambool board have not been inspired to each write a letter of support.

And so the levy will – or should – be put out of its misery on Monday.

The question now is where to from here for Warrnambool business? As we wrote last week, the latest local business survey indicates these are glum times for many businesses, which is such a contrast to what we saw when travelling through Traralgon earlier this week.

This slightly smaller city than Warrnambool was jumping: a few empty shops, yes, but still bustling.

Traralgon is the biggest city between Pakenham and Canberra and Warrnambool is the biggest city between Geelong and Adelaide: they should both be thriving.

Could it be the free, timed parking in Traralgon that helps? Lower rents? A mix of big-name stores (Officeworks, Big W, Harvey Norman etc) and niche traders?

This is the conversation we are still yet to have.

[button link=”http://the-terrier.com.au/subscribe-2/” type=”icon” icon=”heart” newwindow=”yes”]If you would like early access to Opinion pieces, please subscribe to Bluestone.[/button]

You can find earlier Opinion pieces here…

 

Sucking the wind out of Portland’s sails

Fun4Kids: the missing bits

Fun4Kids faces axe after cost blowout

We reveal the ‘mystery man’ behind $20m apartments

Granny’s Grave buried in bureaucracy

All words, no funding, for Fletcher Jones story

Grappling with the work of a predator

 

OPINION

[dropcap style=”font-size: 60px; color: #DC943C;”] A [/dropcap]fter months of often acrimonious debate, Warrnambool traders will have an historic vote from next week on whether they want to pay a special levy for a chamber of commerce – and those against the move will have to work a lot harder than those in favour.

It is the first time the Warrnambool City Council has used its power to introduce special rates and levies on behalf of a specific group – Commerce Warrnambool – and at this scale; 1337 traders will be affected.

The proposed levy will cost each trader up to $300 a year for the next five years and give Commerce Warrnambool an annual budget of at least $300,000 to spend on marketing the city, advocating for business and setting up networking opportunities and professional workshops.

Under the strange rules of the Victorian Local Government Act, those traders who don’t want to pay the levy will have to jump through hoops to make sure their vote is counted, whereas those who support the levy won’t have to do anything.

Here are the steps:

First, traders who object have to make sure they receive the notice that is coming in the mail from the council.

Second, they have to tick the “no” box.

Third, they have to attach evidence that they are responsible for paying the rates on their business premises, either by attaching a copy of their lease, a letter from the property owner, or a stat dec.

Fourth, they have to mail the letter back (postage paid).

And they have to do it all by November 3.

[dropcap style=”font-size: 60px; color: #DC943C;”] I [/dropcap]t’s a time consuming list of things to do while also running a business, a family and a life, but this is what dissenting traders will have to do if they wish to be heard.

Not only that, but almost 670 traders will have to make the effort if the “no” vote is to succeed, whereas the remaining 670 voters who might support the levy can sit tight.

It is a cockeyed system and reflects the history of this part of the Local Government Act, which was introduced in 1989 so that local councils could raise “special rates and charges” for all manner of things from footpaths and drainage works, to shopping centre promotions.

It seems when there is more ratepayer money to be made, the harder it is to object, the better!

Not surprisingly, given how the voting system works, the “no” campaign – aka The Warrnambool Traders Action Group – has been hitting both the pavement and social media for months to argue why the levy should not go ahead and how to vote against it. “No” posters have appeared in shopfronts across town, and its Facebook page has accumulated 477 followers.

By contrast, the “yes” campaign – aka Commerce Warrnambool – has been almost eerily quiet up until the last week, when it began to place ads in the local paper advocating for the levy.

There has been no doorknocking or poster pasting, but its Facebook page did reveal earlier this week that it intended to do an information mailout via the council, until the council said it could not be involved (for obvious reasons). The mailout will now come via Australia Post.

[dropcap style=”font-size: 60px; color: #DC943C;”] T [/dropcap]he difficulty for Commerce Warrnambool in trying to pitch the levy is twofold: first, it is trying to boost its membership by force.

In 2011, a year after Commerce Warrnambool began, it had only 80 members and an annual budget of $24,000. The levy is partly a backdoor way of making traders support an old-fashioned, traditionally male-dominated concept that perhaps has had its day.

Surely if so many traders were keen to support a chamber of commerce, they would just sign up? Meanwhile, new business networks are gathering strength, like the Young Professionals Warrnambool and Business and Professional Women South-West.

Second, despite the best of intentions, the ideas put forward by Commerce Warrnambool have failed to inspire those struggling under the weight of high rents, online shopping and a tired-looking CBD.

Christmas promotions, car raffles and shop-local campaigns are not new. Indeed a council-backed Christmas promotion, complete with Santa arriving by helicopter, ran in 2011 and yet shops are still closing down in the CBD.

Car raffles and the like are short-term, sugar-fixes when what is really needed is an acceptance that the Internet is the industrial revolution of our time and not all businesses will survive. Some will adapt, others will die and new businesses will emerge.

In my view, a new levy won’t make an inch of difference compared to the revitalisation of Liebig St that is underway at last, and a lowering of CBD rents to realistic, regional-based levels (this is in the hands of property owners) to inspire new businesses and support those in transition.

How many traders share this view remains to be seen when the votes finally come in – or not.

[box]Note: If less than 50 per cent of businesses object to the new levy, the council will make the final decision on whether it goes ahead at its December 1 meeting. Anyone can make a submission for or against the levy and can do so in writing by Nov 3 to the CEO, Warrnambool City Council, 25 Liebig St, Warrnambool, 3280. All submissions are public documents.[/box]

[button link=”http://the-terrier.com.au/subscribe-2/” type=”icon” icon=”heart” newwindow=”yes”]Bluestone is aiming for 500 subscribers. If you enjoy Bluestone, please click here to become one![/button]

Read more Opinion pieces here…

All words, no funding, for Fletcher Jones story

Grappling with the work of a predator

Unravelling the mystery of art commissions

Lack of schooling a ticking bomb in south-west

What about more fun for grown-ups?

Council’s racing hospitality bill hard to swallow