Talk:Local government in Australia

Merger of Local government in Australia and Local Government Area

I think this article should be merged with Local Government Area. There is some repetition already and I don't see the point of two articles. There should be a sub-section with this one dealing with the statistical concept.--Arktos ^talk 19:49, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

I don't agree with the merger idea. AFA 23:20, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Why not?--Mattinbgn/ ^talk 23:27, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

I would also turn the Local Government Areas articles in each state into general local government articles. What purpose does a list like Local Government Areas of Queensland serve over Category:Local Government Areas of Queensland or even Template:Local Government Areas of Queensland.. Why not just have a Local Government in Queensland article, include the template and add the category and use the introductory content from the list as a start. Perhaps this needs discussing at WP:AUSTPLACES who maintain the lists, to get a wider range of views. Cheers. --Mattinbgn/ ^talk 01:01, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps move Local Government Areas of Queensland to Local Government in Queensland etc.? It would include the list, but would also be an article about local government in the states in general. --Astrokey44 13:57, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

different states need a section each

I think that each state and territory needs a section. The section on Tasmania for example could mention that local government is mentioned in the constitution (Tas), but is expanded on the Local Government Act 1993 (I think). The sections would also explain what local government means in each state. In Tasmania, libraries are run by the state government, not the councils (for example). I can't be fucked doing anything about it though so ... AFA 23:20, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Isn't that what the state articles e.g Local Government Areas of Queensland do? Or are you saying we should have a précis of each of the state articles in this article. I personally feel that the best layout for this article would lead off with a section covering LG's roles and responsibilities in Australia as a whole, the status of LG under the Australian constitution, federal funding arrangements through Financial Assistance Grants, Roads to Recovery and then compare and contrast between different states and regions (e.g.. urban v. rural)--Mattinbgn/ ^talk 23:34, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

The various local government areas pages only list them. I was thinking something like that. These three paragraphs are from a couple of papers I wrote, they can be incorporated into the article.

The states (and territories) run the majority of the government in Australia and devolve some of this power down to local government, local councils. Because this devolution of power happens on a state by state basis, in different states, the local councils have different powers. Though generally they provide water, sewerage and look after local roads, with the states looking after health, education, police and so on.

Tasmania, like the other states, has a constitution. Unlike the Australian constitution the Tasmanian one is simply an act of parliament, as such to change it requires no more then a majority in the parliament, not a referendum. This constitution (among other things) establishes local government in Part "IVA - Local Government" (Tasmanian Constitution). However, this part while establishing the fact that councils will exist, leaves open how they are operated and what their powers are. Both the system and power of the councils being provided by the "Parliament ... from time to time" (Tasmanian Constitution). It is the "Local Government Act 1993" (referred hereafter to as either the 'LGA' or 'the act') that currently provides for the creation of the various councils, the role of the councillors, what power the councils have and so on.

The act requires that the various councils "provide for the health, safety and welfare of the community", "represent and promote the interests of the community", and "provide for the peace, order and good government of the municipal area". Generally the act permits councils to "do anything necessary or convenient to perform its functions either within or outside its municipal area". Specifically, the act provides for the various councils to have the following powers (among others): to charge land rates, "service rates", special rates and to levy fines (in relation to by-laws); and, to make by-laws in respect to anything the council has power to do.

I'm sure the other states have similar legislation. AFA 23:47, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

New South Wales and Queensland (and I think Victoria) all have Local Government Acts dating to 1993. The NSW and Qld Acts are quite similar in structure and in the powers granted to Councils. There are some differences of course between the states of course. In NSW and Qld, Councils provide water and sewerage services, while these are privatised in Victoria. NSW has a large unincorporated area in the Far West while Qld is fully corporatised. In general, however, the powers granted to LG are fairly similar across states (i.e. roads, rates and rubbish) and a small section pointing out the variation would be useful. I like your paragraphs and would be happy to incorporate into the article.--Mattinbgn/ ^talk 00:55, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

I guess it is perfectly possible that in 1993 the states did attempt to make all the powers of the councils similar. Anyway, I think a small section mentioning the differences would be better then nothing. The various legislation can be found at http://www.austlii.edu.au/databases.html with this if you wanted, you could come up with a really detail list of differences. I'm not doing that just now though (if ever). AFA 17:04, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

The whole LG area in Aust. has been on my list to do for some time, but like you I have no intentions of doing so in the foreseeable future. Thanks for your input.--Mattinbgn/ ^talk

New merger discussion

It has been suggested on both the talkpages Talk:Local government areas of Australia and Talk:Local government in Australia back in ancient history that these two articles should be merged, but nothing appears to have happened to it.

I wish to propose merging them:

• The article local government areas of Australia contains much replication of this content here
• The unique content in that article (that given the current split ought not to be here) is little more than a prose restatement of the table and map thumbnails. Detail on all of these matters is provided in the articles on each state. It strikes me as, at best, unnecessary.
• If two articles is felt needed, the other one ought to be essentially list of lists of local government areas in Australia by state or territory, rather than trying to do descriptive work of what's there. (A less cumbersome title, of course, is a good idea; that one is merely meant to be indicative of what the split article ought to be.)

—Felix the Cassowary 23:05, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Edit the other one into lists of LGAs, which I believe is what readers expect from that title. Mdw0 (talk) 00:23, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Local governments by type and state

Given some recent edits to this table, I have to ask what is the purpose of this table anyway. In particular the use of the term "council" here as some kind of LGA is concerning me. Local government areas are just that: an area, a boundary on a map. We give them a range of names: boroughs/municipalities/towns/cities/shires/districts/regions etc. In most cases the differences in these names naming don't signify anything much - just differences between the states and often differences over time within states (some of the names date back to the 1800s). About the only difference is that names like boroughs/municipalities/towns/cities generally indicate the presence of a large urban area, where terms like shire are sometimes reserved for more rural areas, but there are almost certainly counter-examples of both. Something that was a thriving mining town in the 1800s might be nothing but cattle grazing today and over time a number of rural areas have been subdivided as suburban housing, and often the names of the LGA do not change to reflect the land use change. But I don't believe that the names town/shire etc matter much in terms of their roles and responsibilities, so I am not sure why we are particularly trying to make such distinctions in this table. It may be that in some states there are distinctions in the roles and responsibilities depending on the name, but if so, that's a state issue that can be explained within the relevant article Local Government in WhateverState.

The use of the term council in this table seems to me to be meaningless. Every LGA has some kind of governing body (usually elected). Again, the names for this vary, but council is the most common one , but there may also be some appointed administrators and other arrangements. But my point is this - areas/boundaries are lines on the map, councils/etc are those who run them. It makes no sense to have rows in this table talking about councils, district councils, regional councils etc.

Although I agree that it seems nonsensical to refer to the area administered by a particular local government as a "council", Australian governments are unfortunately run by illiterates, so they will have to get used to it.Lathamibird (talk) 06:25, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

Can I suggest we could just simplify the table by reporting the number of LGAs in each state. Or else decide what criteria should be considered in differentiating between LGAs, eg. has an urban area with greater than X population, which can be objectively decided, rather than basing it on the somewhat random names given to LGAs. Kerry (talk) 21:41, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

It may be that the differently named LGAs have no functional difference between them, and if a RS can be found to support that statement, it should be included. But I think that tabulating the differently named LGAs is interesting gazetteer information and so would seem to belong, per WP:5P1. YBG (talk) 01:27, 18 January 2016 (UTC)