Outraged Pittwater Community fights to stop rising costs of failed merger; Renews Call to reinstate Pittwater Council
On Tuesday February 11 2025 Wendy Tuckerman, previous NSW Minister for Local Government and now Shadow Minister for the same asked Premier Minns;
‘’Last night, North Sydney Council voted to raise rates by 87 per cent. Recently, Northern Beaches Council voted to raise rates by 39.6 per cent. What action is the Government taking to stop these ridiculous rate rises?’’
Premier Chris Minns replied;
‘’We warned members opposite that the amalgamations would not work. We said it over and over again: Don't do it. Do members remember "economies of scale"? Those opposite said, "Don't worry about it; rates are going to come down"—a thing called "economies of scale". We asked, "Are you sure?" They said, "No, we've got it sorted. We will merge all those councils and they will bring down their rates." We said, "We don't know about this one, Mikey". Tooley did it too.
‘’Anyway, the Independent Pricing and Regulatory Tribunal [IPART] makes the decision. The council should not have a rate increase of that much. The new member for Pittwater has made that very clear. She said unambiguously that the costs should not be passed on and that IPART should reject those massive rate increases, but other members in this place said not to worry about it. The member for North Shore said, "I support the Government in its decision to amalgamate councils". She went on to say, "There's significant efficiencies and financial savings that we can achieve".
The Premier continued, stating:
‘’The member for Manly said that his experience with amalgamated councils differs from others and that they are "going from strength to strength". What do you say today, mister?
He went on to say, "Manly has been paying much less than other areas for years. Please don't shoot the messenger!"
We have to give credit to the member for Manly: He was a bit of a Nostradamus when it comes to the amalgamations. On 18 March 2021 he said, "Rates are likely to increase". He knew what we all knew all along—that the amalgamated councils would be a bloody disaster—and that is exactly what has come to fruition.’’
Pittwater residents are outraged by the Northern Beaches Council’s pressing ahead and lodging a submission to IPART seeking a 39.6% rate increase.
On the same day Pittwater MP Jacqui Scruby moved for the house to condemn that Northern Beaches ratepayers face a stark 40% increase in rate rises during a cost-of-living crisis that’s already hurting for people in our community.
Ms Scruby also demanded the Minister for Local Government conduct a public inquiry to scrutinise the performance and efficiency of Northern Beaches Council as well as urging the government to launch an immediate review into local government CEO salaries.
Ms Scruby again called for the government to adopt the recommendations of the inquiry report to the ability of local government to fund infrastructure and services which will put downwards pressure on rates and reduce cost-shifting onto councils.
Ms Scruby is encouraging everyone to sign the two parliamentary e-petitions by residents so they may trigger a debate in the Parliament of NSW.
- Northern Beaches Council proposed rate rise at: https://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/.../ePetition-details...
- Northern Beaches Council Special Rate Variation Proposal at: https://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/.../ePetition-details...
IPART advises for 2025-26, the core rate pegs range from 3.6% to 5.1% across NSW and 72 of the 128 councils also received an additional allowance to reflect an adjusted population factor which ranges from 0% to 3.8%.
''If the elected councillors agree that a council needs additional revenue, the council can apply to IPART for a Special Variation to increase rates income by more than the rate peg amount. Council requests for Special Variations are often to develop or maintain essential community services and infrastructure.
Councils can apply for Special Variations for a single year or multiple years (up to a maximum of 7 years), and it can be permanent or temporary.
You can subscribe to receive email updates about the Special Variations process for 2025-26 including when the consultation period opens. You can subscribe here.
We expect to open our consultation period before the end of February.
At that stage, we will provide more detail on how you can engage with IPART in the 2025-26 Special Variations process, including completing our survey or submitting a submission to us. In the meantime, please refer to our fact sheet on how to engage with us from the 2024-25 Special Variations assessment process.''
However, Pittwater residents, who will see permanent annual increases of thousands under the Northern Beaches Council's application, are still asking why the council taken away from them, Pittwater council, was able to do so much more for so much less.
See December 2024 and January-February 2025 reports:
Northern Beaches Council Passes Motion to Apply for a Permanent 40% Increase in Rates
Rates Variations Options 1 to 4 Prompt ‘Option 5’: Reinstate Pittwater Council
‘’In the eyes of the community this proves the failure of the forced mergers which were meant to deliver services and efficiencies. Our communities are paying the cost for forced amalgamations through inefficiency, cuts to local services and weakened local democracy.’’
“NB council is a bloated bureaucracy, with 40% of its revenue on salaries, a burden to rate payers, ” says Chantal Dray member of the executive committee of Protect Pittwater Association ( PPA).
“On the floor of the NSW Parliament Local Government Minister Ron Hoenig described council amalgamations as a failure. The resultant ‘regional' NB Council is a prime example of this flawed ‘local' policy”.
PPA has been seeking a meeting with Minister Ron Hoenig since last November to present the case for a demerger.
Volunteers of the Protect Pittwater Association have worked tirelessly to gather thousands of residents‘ signatures supporting a demerger and the reinstatement of the smaller successful Pittwater council.
The Association wishes to present the Minister with that petition and the extensive professional business case which demonstrates the viability and savings to the community for this demerger to occur.
“In view of these recent developments, it’s more urgent than ever that the Minister refers our proposal to the NSW Boundaries Commission” says Simon Dunn, President of Protect Pittwater
‘’Reinstating the environmentally distinct from Manly and Warringah Pittwater Council would result in two more easily managed areas, and restore a true local government democracy.’’
Disaffected local communities across NSW including Pittwater, Bombala, Canterbury Bankstown, Central Coast, Cootamundra-Gundagai, Guyra, Inner West, Hilltops and Tumbarumba have consistently campaigned for council de-amalgamation since the forced mergers in May 2016 under the Baird government.
When debating the Local Government Amendment (De-amalgamations) Bill in May 2024, the Greens moved amendments to the government’s bill, including:
- Binding the Minister to act on the result of a referendum on de-amalgamation. The government’s bill stipulates that a demerger progressing is at the Minister’s discretion.
- Allows electors to make a de-amalgamation proposal, which is critical where the amalgamated council itself does not support demerger (the government's bill provided for a council‑led de-amalgamation and as the former Warringah Council campaigned for amalgamation - and the current NBC has been a bloc vote of former Warringah councillors or those from the successor to Your Warringah - the Your Northern Beaches Independent Team - it is unlikely the NBC will support Pittwater council being reinstated).
The Greens framework was essential to reinstate the voices of smaller communities whose councils were amalgamated into larger councils, all of them against the will of those council's residents, such as Pittwater, Guyra, Bombala, and Urana.
However, even though the coalition teamed up with Labor to pass the Bill, the Hon Ron Hoenig stated during that debate:
''Local government amalgamations are extremely unpopular in communities. During my time, both in local and State government, I have always cautioned governments against proceeding with council amalgamations. I have cautioned previous Labor governments and I cautioned the former Government privately as well because it always ends in tears. There is no return to a government of New South Wales for making efficient councils, but the communities that lose their councils never forgive.
In my electorate, where the former Botany council was merged with Mascot council in 1948, there are people in Mascot who do not forgive the government for that merger in 1948. As one moves through New South Wales where mergers have occurred, not only in the most recent amalgamations but in previous mergers from previous governments, people still speak with contempt about the amalgamations of their councils. The reason for that is a local council is a local council. When the council is relatively small, the councillor is only around the corner and the town hall is around the corner. Those smaller councils are very responsive to the communities they represent.''
And more pointedly:
''I have heard from people from Pittwater and other people who want to demerge that they have submitted previously in 2016, 2017 or 2008, or they have submitted proposals under section 215 to the Government and have been told that they need 10 per cent of an entire area, and that is how section 215 is being interpreted. If they were told that, it is wrong.
If it is an approach to the Office of Local Government while I am the Minister, I will proceed in accordance with the Act. I have a sneaking suspicion why they might have been told that and why they think it is accurate, but it is wrong.
I thought I was clear at budget estimates hearings that there is an opportunity to proceed under section 215. I do not need to read the words to the House a third time for it to be clearly understood. I say clearly to all those who think that they do not have an opportunity that they can proceed under section 215. If 250 people in Pittwater signed a request under section 215, I am not sure on what basis they would persuade a Minister for Local Government to refer that to the boundaries commission. But the opportunity is there to have the Minister at least consider it, as a Minister is required to do.''
Hopefully the members of Protect Pittwater, representing thousands of Pittwater residents who want their counciul back, will be successful in obtaining a meeting with Minister Hoenig now that everyone is well and truly back to work.
This past week Minister Hoenig has met Cootamundra-Gundagai mayor Abb McAlister and Cr David Graham, who travelled to Sydney on Tuesday to meet with Minister Hoenig to discuss their demerger in a meeting convened by Member for Cootamundra Steph Cooke.
The Cootamundra-Gundagai Regional Council Public Inquiry is set to hear from the council and residents in Gundagai and Cootamundra this week. Cootamundra-Gundagai mayor Abb McAlister urged his community to attend the hearings in a show of community interest and support of the proposal to demerge the long-embattled council.
“This could be our final chance to demonstrate to the Boundaries Commission and the Minister for Local Government that we believe our communities will be better off operating as separate identities,” Cr McAlister said.
He described the meeting with Minister Hoenig was 'positive''.
Snowy Valleys Council mayor Julia Ham, acting general manager Steve Pinnuck, deputy mayor Hugh Packard and incoming general manager Jessica Quilty met with Boundaries Commissioners Peter Duncan AM (Chairperson), Cr Ruth Fagan, Cr Rick Firman OAM and Grant Gleeson in Tumut on Monday, February 10, to request that a decision on de-amalgamation be made soon and presented to Local Government Minister Ron Hoenig.
Cr Ham said once the decision is made, if positive, it will then go to a referendum for Snowy Valleys ratepayers to vote on.
