Sort comments by new.
You must log in or register to comment.
Cr Cassidy asks if the Lord Mayor will support a Yes vote on the Voice. Points to a number of Liberal politicians around the country, as well as the Brisbane Olympic Organising Committee on which he sits.
The Lord Mayor refuses to say so. Says that there are “some very simple questions” that need to be answered before he can do so. He wants to know how the Jagera, Turrbal, and Quandamooka people will be represented on the Voice.
Some members of the gallery interrupt, presumably criticising the Lord Mayor’s answer. But we can’t actually hear what is said. They are given an order by the Chair to remain silent, and when they refuse to do so are removed from the chamber.
It should be noted that:
- the precise make-up of the Voice is not specified by the constitutional changes, and will be left up to implementing legislation (which can be changed without a referendum).
- The current plan is to give each state 2 members, in addition to a total of 5 (one for Queensland) from remote areas. The representatives of each local area would be decided by local sub-Voices.
As a result, the answer is that most likely the Brisbane indigenous community would receive one representative in the national Voice, and if they didn’t get that they would receive the power to help choose who does represent them. I’d expect to see one for SEQ, one for the non-remote parts of the rest of Queensland, and one remote. With three different Peoples currently represented in BCC, they’d have significant power within the SEQ seat.
But the true answer is that because it’s not specified in the constitutional amendment, it would be flexible to be able to adapt after-the-fact to best serve the function of giving Indigenous Australians a voice.
Cr Massey criticises the reduction in infrastructure charges and asks what guarantee Council will give to ensure that the area covered by the Kurilpa TLPI will keep receiving necessary park and cycleway upgrades for their area.
The Lord Mayor doesn’t really address the question. He calls Cr Massey a “NIMBY” and says that the area already has excellent infrastructure, and says others would laugh at the idea that it needs improving.
Cr Johnston points out that last week Cr Cunningham flicked her the finger, and not long ago Cr Mackay stuck his tongue out at her.
The Chair of Council, Cr Toomey, throws a fit, saying Cr Johnston isn’t allowed to say that.
Opposing the way the LNP chooses to delegate its powers to unelected officials is something Cr Johnston says she has consistently opposed since she became an independent in 2010.
Cr Johnston says “these delegations make it much, much, much harder for us to do our jobs. Because we just don’t know how the decisions are made. When you ask questions about them no one can answer.”
“The Audit Committee is now concerned about delegations… Things only rise up to the Audit Committee if there’s an issue” she says, noting concern at the fact that there’s no transparency around what those issues are. Apparently LNP-supported grants have been approved by delegates “with no paperwork whatsoever”.
Cr Johnston also questions the independence of the Audit Committee, claiming it’s made up of Council Officers who lack the independence which would be required to adhere to best practices.
The Lord Mayor, in summing up, refutes this, and says every member of the committee is independent, and any Council Officers on the committee were invited by independent people outside of Council.
The Lord Mayor speaks in favour of his reduction of 75% of the infrastructure charges on already-aproved developments in high density areas, as well as a 100% reduction (an elimination) of infrastructure charges for community housing providers. 50% reduction in high density areas for future approvals.
He claims the building process being too expensive is the reason not enough housing is being built, and that this move will increase the supply of housing.
Infrastructure charges are a major part of how BCC receives the funding it needs to build and maintain roads, parks, libraries, and all the other things it does to keep the city functioning.
Cr Allan criticises Labor and the Greens. Says that Cr Cassidy (Labor) has called for fining developers who receive approvals but refuse to build until prices get lower.
To help people clean up their gardens in preparation for bushfire and storm seasons, Brisbane City Council offers free green waste recycling drop-off weekends at their Tips, the next of which is this weekend.
The motion from last week that the LNP delayed is being debated now. Calling for the Lord Mayor to provide all advice he has received regarding wildlife fencing along Boundary Rd l, White Hill Reserve.
Cr Griffiths is pationate about it, saying there have been koala deaths and he wants to prevent any more.
He lambasts the Lord Mayor, Cr Cunningham and Cr Adams, who have said they’ve heard advice suggesting fencing this stretch would be counterproductive. None of them are present in the Council hall during this debate.
Cr Mackay seems to be the person designated to respond on behalf of the LNP.
He says that on previous occasions when Cr Griffiths has brought similar motions, the LNP supported them by saying they would listen to the experts and follow expert advice.
He quotes Darryl Jones from Griffith University, saying that fencing roads can be problematic from a wildlife diversity standpoint, because it blocks their movement far more than the road does. He also quotes CSIRO to much the same effect. However, he doesn’t provide anything specific about Boundary Rd.
He does say that a review is being undertaken at Boundary Rd, operated by experts from UQ. He moves that Cr Griffiths motion lie on the table until this report is received.