Councillors decided to borrow $4 million to make repairs to WIRAC in chambers recently, based on WIRAC updates that are no longer available to the public or the media as reported by The Town & Country Journal last week.
The paper asked SDRC staff why the reports are not included as part of the agenda when they arise and were told that council “determined that they do not need to be included as an agenda item as they do not assist councillors in tracking whether the organisation is meeting its strategic objectives.”
Instead, the SDRC’s Annual Report as the “key mechanism” to measure annual data “on these and other activities”.
Mayor Melissa Hamilton, as part of her objectives for this council, has attempted to refocus councillor’s attention on the strategic over the operational. While there is an abundance of popular wisdom underpinning this philosophy, there are limits.
She told The Town & Country Journal that the role of councillors is to “focus on the vision and strategy to create the future”.
The WIRAC reports do not need to be tabled in the mayor’s opinion. “While WIRAC is an important facility for our community, these operational reports don’t help us as councillors in the strategic issues we need to consider or contain recommendations about decisions that councillors need to make.”
Agenda papers, which under this council are far more streamlined than previous councils, “should contain report which focus on monitoring the health and progress of the organisation”. In other words, a big-picture approach rather than a segmented analysis.
The Town & Country Journal has noted that councillors who are not in their first term of office have commented on the leaner agendas.
Mayor Hamilton, however, seems confident in the new direction. “Micromanagement is acknowledged as one of the most common problems that prevents boards from delivering high performance,” she explained. “If agenda papers have a deluge of operational information or are designed for managers, not councillors, then it can lead to micromanagement. Our job is to direct, not manage, council. This means a shift from micromanaging to leading.”
Unpacking the idea of micromanagement and boards and how it applies – or does not apply – to a local council is key.
Removing micromanagement from boards is a common theme amongst ‘leadership solution’ sites, consultants and management organisations. The idea is to create more effective leadership by eliminating time spent on operational details to the detriment of overall strategy.
Local councils, however, are not typically referred to as “boards” according to the Queensland Department of Premier and Cabinet for several reasons. Councils are composed of elected members rather than appointed members; the function of a local government is to enact local policies for their community whereas a board normally advises government ministers; manages public assets; or overseas other agencies or programs. A board’s scope is far narrower than the “overall governance of a local area” that a council is responsible for.
The withdrawal of regular reports from the council agenda also limits the ability of the public and the media to understand information upon which councillors (and staff) are basing decisions. In this case, the information about WIRAC’s status was provided to councillors in a closed meeting and the specifics of that information were never made available to the public as councillors voted to borrow around $4 million for repairs.
Nevertheless, council asserts that data in the once-yearly SDRC annual report are an “excellent resource”.
Interested in a deep dive? Visit www.premiers.qld.gov.au or the Australian parliamentary education office at peo.gov.au and search “three levels of government”.
