Party Politics in Local Government

Hi all,

Does a party-endorsed candidate in local government stand as a representative of the party and it's members or as a representative of the local community with the freedom to vote for their constituents' needs and wants?  I'm sure that they'd say both but surely it is very difficult to be both when your community wants something different to the party's policy stance. 

On the weekend the Tasmanian Labor Party held their state conference.  According to The Examiner Newspaper (I can't find the link online), the Tasmanian Labor Party, at the conference, made a policy decision to endorse candidates for local government elections.  This concerns me greatly.  Is it to counteract the policy stance of the Tasmanian Greens who currently have party-endorsed, sitting members in Local Government.   Their candidates openly campaign as Green candidates.  They currently boast nine Green local councillors.  This has been a policy of the Greens for numerous years and this also concerns me.


My concern is not the fact that they're doing it but for the fact that those 'party-endorsed' candidates will be bound by party policy over local decision-making.  I guess it comes down to whether the local reps have to abide by party policy.  If they don't then why are they endorsed?  I haven't directly spoken to any Green councillors about this but I would find it extremely hard to made a decision that conflicted with party policy and local need.


It's fair to say that all councillors would have a political persuasion of some ilk.  Most do not express it at the council table and, from my experience, don't use this for overall decision-making.  Some openly show their colours - there's quite a few aspiring or former state and federal pollies amongst us.  One recent example in state politics is former Mayor of Waratah-Wynyard Kevin Hyland putting his hand up for Labor.

I'm going to use my council as an example to explain my dilemma.  This is all hypothetical and not using real examples.


At present, no councillor on the Warwyn Council is a party-endorsed candidate (that I'm aware of).  I know there's a few that show their colours now and again but they are not bound by an 'endorser'.


Let's pose a Green example.  The Greens have a platform for the development of a geotrail.  For this example, the Greens have said to Council, "If you put up $X we'll promote and help develop Fossil Bluff and Doctors Rocks as part of the trail".  If Warwyn had a Green candidate then you'd expect them to vote 'Yes' because if they didn't they'd be going against their party's policy on the geotrail.  What happens if the community can't afford it?  Does the Green vote yes with the party or no to support the balancing of the community budget?  Where does their allegiance lie?


Let's pose a Labor example.  Labor has a policy stance to retain the rail network west of Burnie.  If the community rallied to get Council to actively 'picket' Labor to allow it to be used for the Coastal Pathway, would the Labor-endorsed candidate vote along party lines or with the majority voice of the community?  

Let's pose a Liberal example.  The Liberals have recently launched a platform to make all high schools go to year 12.  What happens if a local school votes in the majority to not make their school go to year 12 and asks for Council to back them?  Does the Liberal-endorsed candidate vote along party lines or with the majority decision of the school community?


A collective example is The Tarkine.  What happens if a policy stance is to be made by the Council regarding its vision for the future of the Tarkine in its municipality.  Will a party-endorsed candidate vote for what the community wants or for what their party wants?


This is not even considering people becoming endorsed candidates of other parties like the Socialist Alliance, the Australian Christian Lobby, Family First, the Democrats etc. (some of these hold much more polarising policy stances).


Finally... what happens if, at a council table, one party holds majority?  This is the day that community representation at a local level dies.  More interesting still is if a Council is dominated by X party but Y party is in power in Tasmania.  This is going to be more of an issue if local government secures Constitutional Recognition.

My feeling is that when party politics dominates local independent voice then the little bloke loses their say.  Imagine a retired pensioner running for Council versus a party-endorsed, Obama-style campaigner of the ilk of the Brooksy extravaganza.  What chance does this poor bugger have?  Just over half of Tasmania votes in local government elections.  If parties came into it then I guess that this would rise in favour of parties as voters would have someone on the ballot that they could identify with (even if it is only because they're voting for a party).  It may also have the potential of decreasing the donkey vote as this often occurs as voters do not know the candidates.

Party-endorsed candidates afford an unfair advantage over other candidates as it can encourage people to vote for a party rather than the best candidate for the job.  I'll take a stab that there's people out there who would vote for their party without looking at the quality of the candidates themselves.  Then again... that happens all the time at State and Federal level, doesn't it? 


This may sound like I'm having a sook as I am an independent.  I float across the spectrum picking the best policies across the whole sphere.  A party-endorsed candidate can not do that.  To be honest, it's going to be fun on the day when a party-endorsed candidate becomes elected and I can trip them up on their party's policy versus the decision that they make.  It'll be fun to stand up and say "Even though the data overwhelming says that you should vote yes Mr/Mrs/Miss X... I'm sorry but you can't for this because your party says no".

Finally, I'll put on record that I do not support party politics in local government.  Local government in Tasmania is, in effect, a project of the State Government and so should represent the spectrum of the people that they represent, not broader agendas that may not fit into those communities that they supposedly represent.  This is not criticism of those who are party-endorsed, I just personally wouldn't like to be one.  I would not like to have my decision-making abilities reduced by a higher power.

Ciao all... I'm of the belief that there's going to be some party-endorsed candidates running in 2011 in the Cradle Coast.  Interesting times.