2015-16 representation review guide for …€¦ · web viewa subdivided electoral structure must...

MOYNE SHIRE COUNCILMarch 2019

© State of Victoria (Victorian Electoral Commission) 20 March 2019

Version 2

This work, Local Council Representation Review Preliminary Report – Moyne Shire Council, is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 licence [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/]. You are free to share this work under that licence, on the

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

Local Council Representation Review – Preliminary Report Moyne Shire Council 2019

condition that you do not change any content and you credit the State of Victoria (Victorian Electoral Commission) as author and comply with the other licence terms. The licence does not apply to any branding, including Government logos.


ContentsEXECUTIVE SUMMARY..............................................................................1

BACKGROUND.........................................................................................3

Legislative basis..........................................................................................................................3

Public engagement......................................................................................................................3

The VEC’s principles...................................................................................................................4

Developing recommendations.....................................................................................................5

PUBLIC SUBMISSIONS (PRELIMINARY)......................................................7

THE VEC’S FINDINGS AND OPTIONS........................................................10

Preliminary report findings.........................................................................................................10

Options......................................................................................................................................16

NEXT STEPS..........................................................................................17

Response submissions.............................................................................................................17

Public hearing............................................................................................................................17

Final report................................................................................................................................18

APPENDIX 1: OPTION MAPS....................................................................19

APPENDIX 2: LIST OF PRELIMINARY SUBMISSIONS...................................23

of 28


Executive summaryThe Local Government Act 1989 (the Act) requires the Victorian Electoral Commission (VEC) to

conduct an electoral representation review of each local council in Victoria at least before every

third council general election.

The purpose of a representation review is to recommend an electoral structure that provides fair

and equitable representation for the persons who are entitled to vote at a general election of the

council. The matters considered by a review are:

the number of councillors

the electoral structure of the council (whether the council should be unsubdivided or

divided into wards and, if subdivided, the details of the wards).

The VEC conducts all reviews based on three main principles:

1. taking a consistent, State-wide approach to the total number of councillors

2. if subdivided, ensuring the number of voters represented by each councillor is within plus-

or-minus 10 per cent of the average number of voters per councillor for that local council

3. ensuring communities of interest are as fairly represented as possible.

2019 electoral representation reviewThe 2019 representation review for Moyne Shire Council commenced on Wednesday 23 January

2019.

Current electoral structureMoyne Shire Council currently comprises seven councillors elected from an unsubdivided

electoral structure. Prior to the last representation review in 2007, Moyne Shire Council was

comprised of 10 councillors elected from five two-councillor wards.

Visit the VEC website at vec.vic.gov.au to access a copy of the 2007 review final report.

Preliminary submissionsAt the close of preliminary submissions at 5.00 pm on Wednesday 20 February 2019, the VEC

had received 12 submissions for the representation review of Moyne Shire Council. These

submissions can be viewed from the VEC website at vec.vic.gov.au and a list of those people or

organisations who made a submission is available at Appendix 2.

Page 1 of 22

http://www.vec.vic.gov.au/



VEC optionsThe following options are being considered by the VEC:

Option A (preferred option)

Moyne Shire Council consist of seven councillors elected from an unsubdivided electoral structure.

Option B (alternative option)

Moyne Shire Council consist of seven councillors elected from five wards (two two-councillor wards and three single-councillor wards).

Option C (alternative option)

Moyne Shire Council consist of seven councillors elected from three wards (two two-councillor wards and one three-councillor ward).

Page 2 of 22


BackgroundLegislative basisThe Act requires the VEC to conduct a representation review of each local council in Victoria

before every third general council election, or earlier if gazetted by the Minister for Local

Government.

The Act specifies that the purpose of a representation review is to recommend the number of

councillors and the electoral structure that provides ‘fair and equitable representation for the

persons who are entitled to vote at a general election of the Council.’1

The Act requires the VEC to consider:

the number of councillors in a local council

whether a local council should be unsubdivided or subdivided.

If a local council should be subdivided, the VEC must ensure that the number of voters

represented by each councillor is within plus-or-minus 10 per cent of the average number of

voters per councillor for that local council.1 On this basis, the review must consider the:

number of wards

ward boundaries

number of councillors that should be elected for each ward.

Public engagement

Public information program The VEC conducts a public information program to inform the community of the representation

review, including:

public notices printed in local and state-wide papers

public information sessions to outline the review process and respond to questions from

the community

a media release announcing the commencement of the review

coverage through the local council’s media

advertising on the VEC’s social media

contact with community groups and networks

ongoing information updates and publication of submissions on the VEC website

1 Section 219D of the Local Government Act 1989.

Page 3 of 22


a submission guide to explain the review process and provide background information on

the scope of the review.

Public consultationPublic input is accepted by the VEC in:

preliminary submissions at the start of the review

response submissions to the preliminary report

a public hearing that provides an opportunity for people who have made a response

submission to expand on this submission.

Public submissions are an important part of the process but are not the only consideration during

a review. The VEC ensures its recommendations are in compliance with the Act and are formed

through careful consideration of public submissions, independent research, and analysis of all

relevant factors.

The VEC’s principlesThree main principles underlie all the VEC’s work on representation reviews:

1. Taking a consistent, State-wide approach to the total number of councillors.

The VEC is guided by its comparisons of local councils of a similar size and category to

the council under review. The VEC also considers any special circumstances that may

warrant the local council having more or fewer councillors than similar local councils.

2. If subdivided, ensuring the number of voters represented by each councillor is within plus-or-minus 10 per cent of the average number of voters per councillor for that local council.

This is the principle of ‘one vote, one value’, which is enshrined in the Act. This means

that every person’s vote counts equally.

3. Ensuring communities of interest are as fairly represented as possible.

Each local council contains a number of communities of interest. Where practicable, the

electoral structure should be designed to ensure they are fairly represented, and that

geographic communities of interest are not split by ward boundaries. This allows elected

councillors to be more effective representatives of the people and interests in their

particular local council or ward.

Developing recommendationsThe VEC bases its recommendations for particular electoral structures on the following

information:

Page 4 of 22


internal research specifically relating to the local council under review, including the

Australian Bureau of Statistics and .id data2; voter statistics from the Victorian electoral

roll; and other State and local government data sets

the VEC’s experience conducting previous electoral representation reviews of local

councils and similar reviews for State elections

the VEC’s expertise in mapping, demography and local government

careful consideration of all input from the public in written submissions received during

the review

advice from consultants with extensive experience in local government.

Deciding on the number of councillorsThe Act allows for a local council to have between 5 and 12 councillors but does not specify how

to decide the appropriate number.3 In considering the number of councillors for a local council,

the VEC is guided by the Victorian Parliament’s intention for fairness and equity in the local

representation of voters under the Act.

The starting point in deciding the number of councillors appropriate for a local council is

comparing the council under review to other local councils of a similar type and size. Generally,

those local councils that have a larger number of voters will have a higher number of councillors.

Often large populations are more likely to be diverse, both in the nature and number of their

communities of interest and the issues of representation.

However, the VEC also considers the particular circumstances of each local council which could

be cause for more or less councillors, such as:

the nature and complexity of services provided by the Council

geographic size and topography

population growth or decline

the social diversity of the local council.

Deciding the electoral structureThe Act allows for a local council ward structure to be unsubdivided—with all councillors elected

‘at-large’ by all voters or subdivided into a number of wards.

If the local council is to be subdivided into wards, there are three options available:

1. single-councillor wards

2 .id is a consulting company specialising in population and demographic analysis and prediction information products in most jurisdictions in Australia and New Zealand.3 Section 5B(1) of the Local Government Act 1989.

Page 5 of 22


2. multi-councillor wards or

3. a combination of single-councillor and multi-councillor wards.

A subdivided electoral structure must involve internal ward boundaries that provide for a fair and

equitable division of the local council.

The Act allows for wards with different numbers of councillors, as long as the number of voters

represented by each councillor is within plus-or-minus 10 per cent of the average number of

voters per councillor for that local council (Principle 2). For example, a local council may have

one three-councillor ward with 15,000 voters and two single-councillor wards each with 5,000

voters. In this case, the average number of voters per councillor would be 5,000.

Over time, population changes can lead to some wards in subdivided local councils having larger

or smaller numbers of voters. As part of the review, the VEC corrects any imbalances and takes

into account likely population changes to ensure ward boundaries provide equitable

representation for as long as possible.

In considering which electoral structure is most appropriate, the VEC considers the following

matters:

the VEC’s recommendation at the previous representation review and the reasons for

that recommendation

the longevity of the structure, with the aim of keeping voter numbers per councillor within

the 10 per cent tolerance for as long as possible (Principle 2)

communities of interest, consisting of people who share a range of common concerns,

such as geographic, economic or cultural associations (Principle 3)

the number of candidates in previous elections, as outcomes from previous elections

indicate that large numbers of candidates can lead to an increase in the number of

informal (invalid) votes

geographic factors, such as size and topography

clear ward boundaries.

Page 6 of 22


Public submissions (preliminary)The VEC received 12 preliminary submissions by the deadline for submissions at 5.00 pm on

Wednesday 20 February 2019. These submissions can be viewed from the VEC website at

vec.vic.gov.au and a list of those people or organisations who made a submission is available at

Appendix 2.

The matrix below provides an overview of preferences in the preliminary submissions. Detailed

analysis of the submissions follows.

Submitter wanted fewer

wards

Submitter wanted ward

number to remain

unchanged

Submitter wanted more

wards

Submitter did not comment on

number of wards

Submitter wanted fewer councillors

Submitter wanted

councillor number to

remain unchanged

2 2*

Submitter wanted more councillors

1 7*

Submitter did not comment on number of councillors

1 1^

* Some submissions nominated a preference for more than one option.

^ The submission commented on services provided by Moyne Shire Council and is outside the scope of this review.

Number of councillors Three submissions stated that they wanted councillor numbers to remain the same at seven. Of

these, Moyne Shire Council noted that the current number of councillors was comparable with

similar sized rural councils, was consistent with a modest rate of projected population growth and

placed the Shire in the top quartile for voter representation. The Proportional Representation

Society of Australia (Victoria-Tasmania) Inc. (PRSA) advocated seven councillors (or five if it

could be justified and was acceptable to the local community), preferring an odd number on the

basis that it upholds the principle of majority support leading to majority representation. Kelvin

Page 7 of 22



Goodall submitted that increasing the number of councillors would be the most effective way to

facilitate multi-member wards, but agreed that seven councillors was consistent with comparable

rural councils and modelled a multi-councillor ward structure based on current councillor

numbers.

The majority of submissions (8 out of 12) proposed increasing the number of councillors to

between a range of eight and ten. Half of these preferred a ten-councillor local council while the

others opted for eight- or nine-councillors. These submitters were generally of the view that

increasing councillor numbers would provide the most effective and fairest form of

representation. One submitter advocated a ten-councillor local council because of Moyne Shire’s

large geographical area, while another suggested increasing councillor numbers to nine for the

same reason and added that the current number of councillors gives the impression that some of

the smaller towns are not represented. One submitter suggested eight councillors, though mainly

in reference to subdividing the local council into four wards, while another submitter was unsure

about the exact number of councillors—seven, nine or ten—but felt that councillor numbers

should be determined according to a subdivided structure and whether an odd number of

councillors was preferred.

Of the submissions that advocated increasing the number of councillors, a perceived lack of

representation was the key issue, with most proposals suggesting that increasing councillor

numbers would improve local representation. As such, most discussed increasing the number of

councillors in connection to a subdivided electoral structure based on geographical communities

of interest.

Electoral structure A large proportion of submissions desired a subdivided electoral structure, with many of these

suggesting that the previous structure of five wards provided fairer representation. Amongst

these submissions, there was a clear preference for single-councillor wards, while two

submissions proposed a multi-councillor ward structure. There was less support from submitters

for remaining unsubdivided.

Unsubdivided

Three submissions supported maintaining an unsubdivided electoral structure. The PRSA

advocates proportional representation as the fairest and most effective approach and

recommended an unsubdivided structure as the only way proportional representation could

effectively be applied to a seven- or five-councillor local council. Moyne Shire Council submitted

that the current structure encouraged a unified, team approach for council and its strategic

direction, and suggested that subdivision might encourage a segmented or individual approach

to these matters. The Council also viewed the spread of councillors from across the Shire as

important for equal and fair representation and believed this had been achieved in recent

Page 8 of 22


elections. Another submission suggested an unsubdivided electoral structure as the best way to

balance the needs of ratepayers and locally responsive representation, stating that the best

candidates tend to get elected under the current structure.

Single-councillor

All of those (four submitters) who proposed a ten-councillor local council recommended an

electoral structure comprising ten single-councillor wards. They felt this was the best structure to

facilitate local representation. One submission suggested that the current unsubdivided electoral

structure did not represent all communities and that ten single-councillor wards was the best

approach to equitable representation. Two submitters commented that most councillors either

lived in or tended to favour the major townships, particularly Port Fairy, with one suggesting that

the Council did not equally represent all ratepayers and the whole local council area. Both

submitters suggested that a structure of ten single-councillor wards would be the best way to

ensure equal representation for all electors and geographical communities of interest, especially

those in the north of the Shire. Another submitter felt that councillors elected within ten single-

councillor wards would be more accessible and responsive to local residents and local interests.

In proposing seven, nine or ten single-councillor wards as more appropriate to the size of the

local council area and its demographics, one submission was of the view that such an electoral

structure would make councillors more accessible and accountable to voters.

Multi-councillor

One submission proposed an electoral structure of three wards (one three-councillor and two

two-councillor wards) as the best way to improve local representation and to address a

perception of a concentration of councillors in and around Port Fairy and the south of the Shire.

The proposal consists of a two-councillor ward encompassing the northern regions; a south-east

central ward consisting of three councillors, and includes Koroit and extends to the Shire’s south-

eastern boundary; and a two-councillor south-west ward encompassing Port Fairy and extending

to the south-western border of the Shire. This was considered an appropriate electoral structure

to provide distinct geographical communities of interest in the north and south with fair

representation. Another submitter felt that subdividing the local council into wards was the most

democratic form of local government and proposed an electoral structure of four two-councillor

wards. This submitter felt that more effective and equitable representation was provided under

the pre-2007 structure of wards.

Mixed

There were no submissions proposing a mixed structure of single- and multi-councillor wards.

However, on account of the information collected as part of the review process and research

conducted by the VEC, a mixed structure was explored and modelled.

Page 9 of 22


The VEC’s findings and optionsPreliminary report findings

Number of councillorsThe VEC takes a consistent, state-wide approach to the total number of councillors and is guided

in its recommendations by comparing local councils of a similar size and category to the council

under review. As the below table indicates, Moyne Shire Council fits comfortably in the middle of

the seven-councillor band for Country Victorian councils.

Comparable Country Victorian councils to Moyne Shire Council

Local councilPopulation

(2016 Census)

Number of voters at last

review

Current estimate of

votersNumber of councillors

Number of voters per councillor

Colac Otway Shire* 20,972 19,198 20,750 7 2,964

Glenelg Shire* 19,557 16,333 17,570 7 2,510

Murrindindi Shire* 13,732 13,727 14,570 7 2,081

Moyne Shire* 16,495 12,420 14,424 7 2,060

Indigo Shire 15,952 12,920 13,725 7 1,960

Alpine Shire 12,337 11,575 11,929 7 1,704

Northern Grampians Shire* 11,439 10,540 10,882 7 1,554

Moyne Shire covers an area of 5,478 square kilometres and has a current population of 16,495.

It has 14,424 voters, which are represented by seven councillors, making the average number of

voters per councillor 2,060. This ratio is consistent with similar Country Victorian councils.

Population forecasts suggest a modest rate of growth at about 0.5% annually from 2011 to 2031,

most of which is expected to take place in Port Fairy and surrounding suburbs. The population is

evenly distributed throughout Moyne Shire with approximately 53% of the population living

outside of the major towns of Port Fairy, Koroit, Mortlake, Macarthur and Woolsthorpe.

The key argument of preliminary submissions for increasing the number of councillors was the

geographical size of the council and the distribution of its population across a large area.

Councillors representing larger geographical areas do have travel times to consider, which might

be lessened through a great number of councillors. However, the current and anticipated

population of Moyne Shire Council is consistent with similar seven-councillor municipalities of

comparable size.

Page 10 of 22


Geographical size is one of many factors considered by the VEC when recommending the

number of councillors. The VEC also considers the various services provided by councils,

population growth and decline, population distribution, and the social composition of the local

council, including cultural diversity and social disadvantage.

The Shire rates well on measures of social and community well-being and fares better than other

localities in relation to social and economic disadvantage. The council’s population is largely

culturally and linguistically similar, with many residents born in Australia and speaking English-

only at home. Some residents were born overseas, mainly from the United Kingdom and New

Zealand, with smaller numbers from the Philippines, Netherlands and Germany. There are

currently no special circumstances, such as a high rate of projected population growth or

significant social disparities, that would warrant increasing the current number of councillors.

It was also suggested in preliminary submissions that a greater number of councillors would

provide fairer representation for the populations dispersed throughout the local council area and

for those outside of the major towns or population centres, particularly the north and north-west.

The VEC is not convinced that increasing the number of councillors will increase the spread of

nominated and elected candidates. It is also of the view that with exception of the north and

north-west a reasonable spread of candidates and elected councillors has been achieved in

recent elections. Drawing from historical election data, the VEC identified the location of

candidates and councillors in the last three general elections. Currently, there are two councillors

from Port Fairy and one each from Mortlake, Mailor’s Flat, Garvoc, Pura Pura and Woolsthorpe.

At the 2012 election, three councillors were elected from Port Fairy, with the remaining coming

from Illowa, Woolsthorpe, Mailor’s Flat and Mortlake. In 2008, the seven elected councillors were

from Port Fairy, Panmure, Mortlake, Woolsthorpe, Koroit and Mailor’s Flat, and one from outside

the Shire. Therefore, increasing the number of councillors would not necessarily translate to

improved representation for parts of the north.

The VEC considers that seven councillors is appropriate for the size and population of Moyne

Shire Council to achieve fair and equitable representation.

Electoral structureThe VEC has developed three viable models, taking into account:

the preliminary submissions

detailed research, including information on population projections over the coming

decade, and the identification of communities of interest.

Option A proposes a no change option, comprising an unsubdivided electoral structure with all

councillors elected by voters from across the Shire on the basis of proportional representation.

Option B looks to capture key geographical communities of interest, including those in the north-

Page 11 of 22


west, north-east and south-east. Option B is similar to the alternative option put forward at the

2007 representation review,4 with slightly different ward boundaries to accommodate population

change. Option C was captured from a preliminary submission and looks to resolve the

perceived need for greater representation of northern voters and their particular interests

expressed by some preliminary submitters.

In developing viable alternatives to the current electoral structure, the VEC accepts the local

interest expressed through preliminary submissions for introducing a subdivided electoral

structure. The VEC notes the number of submissions that were particularly concerned that

issues of voters outside the major towns are not being fairly represented, prioritising the need to

guarantee representation for voters in the north and north-west of the Shire. For these reasons

two models (Option B and Option C) were developed that address these concerns.

Option A: seven councillors elected from an unsubdivided electoral structure

The VEC’s analysis of the last three general elections shows that the current electoral structure

is achieving a fair distribution of councillors elected from across the Shire. While there was a

notable push for more local elected representatives through preliminary submissions to this

review, particularly from submitters concerned with representation for the north and north-west

areas of the Shire, the desire for local representation for these areas has not translated into

putting candidates forward at the last three elections. The broad distribution of voters across

Moyne Shire combined with the characteristics of proportional representation gives candidates

with a moderate level of support from their local area a good chance of being elected.

Notwithstanding the above, the VEC has also found no evidence suggesting that electors from

Port Fairy are or have been disproportionately represented on Moyne Shire Council. It is noted

that while councillors under any electoral structure are required to decide on behalf of the whole

of the council area, the current unsubdivided electoral structure means that councillors on Moyne

Shire Council are also directly accountable to all voters across the Shire at each general

election.

The current electoral structure appears to be delivering elected members that are effectively

responding to issues in relation to council-wide and non-geographic communities of interest.

While the VEC’s research identified differences between some localities, particularly the rural

regions in the north and south-east of the council and the major population centres in the south,

such as Port Fairy and surrounding suburbs, shared and common interests are evident. These

include concerns about development along the coastal regions and across the Shire in the form

of wind farms. The VEC is of the view that balancing regional development and growth with

concerns around protecting natural habitats and managing the impact of development on local

communities benefits from a municipality-wide approach to council decision-making; mutual

4 View the final report from the 2007 representation review on the VEC website at vec.vic.gov.au.

Page 12 of 22

https://www.vec.vic.gov.au/


interests between tourism and more traditional forms of economic activity, such as agriculture,

likewise benefits from the current unsubdivided electoral structure and a system of proportional

representation that provides a voice to majorities and large minorities.

An unsubdivided structure provides increased choice of candidates for voters and avoids the risk

of uncontested elections, which is more common in single-councillor wards (and was observed in

Moyne Shire Council, under the previous electoral structure, during the 2002 and 2004 general

elections). Since adopting the unsubdivided electoral structure in 2007, voters have had a large

pool of candidates to choose from in each successive election.

Importantly, an unsubdivided electoral structure avoids the problem of ward boundaries dividing

communities of interest. This is particularly important for the southern areas, where voter density

is greatest and population growth could spill over into adjoining areas, potentially dividing

communities of interest under a subdivided electoral structure.

Option B: Subdivided—seven councillors elected from two two-councillor wards and three single-councillor wards)

Option B provides an electoral structure which collects each of the main geographical

communities of Moyne Shire Council into separate wards. The number of councillors is assigned

according to enrolled voters, with one councillor each for the north-west, north-east and south-

east wards, and two each for the south-west (including Port Fairy) and central wards (including

Koroit and surrounds). The electoral structure promotes local representation based on the notion

that elected councillors will be knowledgeable about more local issues and more accessible to

voters. The smaller electorates in this option reduce the geographical area and number of voters

each councillor represents, thereby assisting to relieve some of the workload involved with

councillors having to traverse the entire council area to connect with constituents under the

current unsubdivided electoral structure.

An electoral structure similar to Option B was also proposed as an alternative model at the last

Representation Review of Moyne Shire Council in 2007. The present model has slight boundary

adjustments to accommodate population change and projected population growth, and to keep

Koroit and adjacent localities together on account of their similar interests. As such, Option B

ensures that ward enrolments are likely to be sustainable and the voter-to-councillor ratios will

remain within the accepted tolerance until, at least, the next scheduled representation review in

2030-31.

The wards in Option B are generally defined by geographical communities of interest: the town of

Port Fairy and surrounds, extending south-west; in the centre, Koroit and surrounding townships;

the largely rural south-east, including Peterborough, which is geographically distinct and

relatively isolated from the rest of the Shire; the north-west, including Macarthur, which is

primarily rural and defined largely by farming interests; and the north-east, including Mortlake,

Page 13 of 22


which is also rural and mainly farming country. While the north-west and north-east areas share

a similar sociodemographic profile, it was noted during the 2007 review that these communities

tend to interact north-south in the Shire rather than east-west, and gravitate toward separate

towns outside of the Shire, including Hamilton and Warrnambool, respectively. The VEC’s

analysis for this review found these north-south and Hamilton/Warrnambool links largely remain,

but also that the northern communities are feeling increasingly isolated from the coastal regions

of the Shire.

While Option B facilitates dedicated representation for the north, there is an underlying risk of

uncontested or failed elections for the single-councillor wards at future elections. This is

particularly the case given the electoral history preceding the current unsubdivided electoral

structure and the VEC’s observation that there have been no candidates from the north-west of

the Shire since before the 2008 general election.

Option C: Subdivided—seven councillors elected from one three–councillor ward and two two-councillor wards.

Option C was proposed and mapped in a preliminary submission by Kelvin Goodall, who made a

compelling case for considering it as a viable model. The VEC made slight adjustments to Mr

Goodall’s suggested boundaries to accommodate current and projected enrolments within the

accepted tolerances.

Like Option B, the model is subdivided according to major geographical communities of interest:

the large north ward encapsulates large-scale faming activities, such as sheep and cattle grazing

and cropping, and has a similar history of settlement; the south-west ward focuses on Port Fairy

and tourism interests; and the central south-east ward has a mixture of residential development,

tourist activities, and agriculture to the south-east, namely dairying. In all wards there is a good

chance that councillors will be elected on more local issues and that they will be more accessible

to their communities. Councillors within the same ward might also work together and share

workloads more effectively.

The VEC’s analysis shows that multi-councillor wards have much less chance than single-

councillor wards of being uncontested at elections. However, there is still no guaranteed local

representation for the north-west of the Shire under this option, which was a principal concern

among those preliminary submitters that supported a subdivided electoral structure. As

discussed earlier in this report, unlike the north-west communities, the north-east of the Shire

has put up candidates at recent elections, so without a local candidate from the north-west of the

Shire, the area will remain unrepresented by a local councillor.

The north ward in Option C also takes in a very large geographical area and spans multiple

communities of interest, which may be problematic if local issues are a determining factor in

election results. In much the same way, the south-east central ward encompasses several

Page 14 of 22


distinct communities, including Koroit and surrounds, coastal plains, and dairy farming in the

south-east and Peterborough, which sits at the eastern most point of the Shire. The VEC has

observed that few candidates have come from the south-east of the Shire since before the 2008

general election, suggesting that the two-councillor south-east ward may also not achieve the

desired local representation.

OptionsThe VEC is required by the Act to include a preferred option and may include one or more

alternative options for the electoral structure in the preliminary report. The VEC considers that all

the options outlined below offer fair and equitable representation for voters. Please see Appendix

1 for detailed maps of these options.

Option A (preferred option)Moyne Shire Council consist of seven councillors elected from an unsubdivided electoral structure.

Option B (alternative option)Moyne Shire Council consist of seven councillors elected from five wards (two two-councillor wards and three single-councillor wards).

Option C (alternative option)Moyne Shire Council consist of seven councillors elected from three wards (two two-councillor wards and one three-councillor ward).

Ward namesThe VEC has suggested ward names to identify wards in Option B and Option C. The VEC

invites comments from the community on these ward names as part of submissions responding

to the preliminary report.

Page 15 of 22


Next stepsResponse submissionsAny person or group, including the council, can make a submission to the VEC in response to

the options contained in this report. Response submissions to the preliminary report should

address the models proposed by the VEC within this report. Response submissions must be

received by the VEC by 5.00 pm on Wednesday 17 April 2019. Late submissions will not be

accepted.

Submissions must include the full name, address and contact telephone number of the submitter.

Submissions without this information cannot be accepted.

Submission methodsSubmissions can be made via:

The online submission form at vec.vic.gov.au

Email at [email protected]

Post toVictorian Electoral CommissionLevel 11, 530 Collins StreetMelbourne VIC 3000

Public access to submissionsTo ensure transparency in the electoral representation review process, all submissions will be

available for public inspection at the:

VEC website at vec.vic.gov.au

VEC office at Level 11, 530 Collins Street, Melbourne.

The VEC will remove personal information such as address, phone number and signature, if

applicable, from all public copies. However, the full name and locality of submitters will be

displayed.

Public hearingThere is an opportunity for people or organisations who have made a response submission to

speak about their submission at the public hearing. The public hearing is scheduled to be held at

4.00 pm on Wednesday 24 April 2019 at the Port Fairy Community Services Centre, 16 Atkinson

Street, Port Fairy. If you wish to speak at the public hearing, you must indicate this on your

response submission. If there are no requests to speak at the hearing, it will not be held.

Page 16 of 22


mailto:[email protected]

http://vec.vic.gov.au/


Final reportFollowing the public hearing, the VEC considers all the evidence it has gathered and publishes a

final report for the Minister for Local Government containing a recommended electoral structure.

The report is scheduled to be published on Wednesday 15 May 2019. Any changes resulting

from the final report will apply at the October 2020 general election.

The final report will be available from the VEC by visiting vec.vic.gov.au or calling 131 832 and

for inspection at the offices of Moyne Shire Council.

Page 17 of 22



Appendix 1: Option mapsThe following maps are included in this report:

Map Page

Option A (preferred option) 19

Option B (alternative option) 20

Option C (alternative option) 21

Page 18 of 22


Page 19 of 22


Page 20 of 22


Page 21 of 22


Appendix 2: List of preliminary submissionsTwelve preliminary submissions were received in total. Submissions were made by:

Paul Bucci

Hamish Cumming

Lachlan Cumming

Ann & Andrew Gardner

Kelvin Goodall

Heather Hicks

John Howard

Geoffrey Humble

Christine Jelbart

Paul Lewis

Moyne Shire Council

Proportional Representation Society of Australia (Victoria-Tasmania) Inc.

Page 22 of 22

This page has been left intentionally blank

2015-16 representation review guide for …€¦ · web viewa subdivided electoral structure must...

Documents