Anne Webster (Mallee, National Party, Shadow Minister for Regional Development, Local Government and Territories) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That this House:

(1) notes that:

(a) fourteen months ago, the Minister for Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government referred the local government sustainability inquiry to the Standing Committee on Regional Development, Infrastructure and Transport because local government faced 'pressing issues' and that the inquiry was 'long overdue';

(b) local councils are finding it increasingly difficult to maintain their financial sustainability, especially in the regions;

(c) the President of the Australian Local Government Association, Matt Burnett, asserts that 'financial sustainability is the biggest challenge facing our sector' with many councils 'at breaking point after years of delivering more local services and infrastructure with less funding';

(d) the Government-dominated inquiry only delivered an interim report 11 months after it started, and the inquiry lapsed at the dissolution of the House of Representatives;

(e) the inquiry's interim report made no recommendations; and

(f) the interim report identified emerging themes including:

(i) the significant expansion in the role of local government over time, much of which is due to cost shifting from other levels of government;

(ii) calls for a review of the Financial Assistance Grants program, and in particular the distribution formula, quantum of the funding pool, indexation methodology, and the national principles;

(iii) concerns by councils about the reliance on competitive grant programs requiring co-contributions;

(iv) limits to revenue generation in some areas due to rate capping in Victoria and rate pegging in New South Wales; and

(v) considerable skills shortages experienced by councils which are exacerbated in the regions; and

(2) calls upon the Minister, as a first order of business, to refer the matter to the committee afresh to continue the unfinished inquiry and let it deliver a final report, for the sake of the 537 local councils and shires around the country.

In my first contribution in this place as the shadow minister for local government, I was already well familiar, as were my colleagues in the Nationals, with the challenges that shires and councils face, because, unlike those opposite, we have multiple councils—if not a dozen or more in cases like Mallee—in our electorates. Ours are small, rural councils with large geographical areas and small rate bases. Financial sustainability is not a whisper in regional Australia; it is the ongoing No. 1 agenda item for every council meeting. The President of the Australian Local Government Association, Matt Burnett, agrees, saying that this is the biggest challenge facing the sector with many councils 'at breaking point'. Their viability is at stake. Rural and regional councils with small populations dispersed over vast distances, such as the West Wimmera and Yarriambiack shires in my electorate, have limited income but many hundreds of kilometres of roads to maintain. Victorian councils' sustainability challenges are exacerbated by the Victorian government's rate capping, which, for the 2025-26 financial year, limits increases in total rate revenue to three per cent per annum in Victoria.

Many councils, especially those in the regions, often pick up the bill when failed markets and centralisation mean essential services like aged care, child care and health care are failing. West Wimmera Shire Council in the south-west of Mallee includes Kaniva, Goroke and Edenhope and has been providing local people with childcare and aged-care services over many years. Yarriambiack Shire Council also provides early learning services, and Northern Grampians delivers aged-care services, just to name a few. In other parts of the country, rural councils run primary healthcare services, demonstrating the cost-shifting from other levels of government putting strain on council finances. Fourteen months ago, Catherine King, Minister for Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government referred the question of local government sustainability as an inquiry to the Standing Committee on Regional Development, Infrastructure and Transport because local government faced pressing issues, and the inquiry was long overdue.

Fellow minister Kristy McBain said the inquiry built upon feedback received in the preceding 18 months, yet the Labor dominated inquiry only delivered an interim report 11 months after it started and was then prorogued for the election. The inquiry's interim report made no recommendations. Not only did the interim report identify as an emerging theme that councils had limited means to generate revenue yet had an expanded role due to cost-shifting from other levels of government; a significant number of submitters called for a review of the financial assistance grants program. Submitters also called out the reliance on competitive grants processes that require significant co-contributions, which are very difficult for small rural councils to comply with. Worse still, state governments like the Allan Victorian Labor government have cut funding programs, like the Regional Jobs and Infrastructure Fund, that supported regional shires with co-contributions.

The financial assistance grants scheme is a critical funding source for local government. These grants, which councils and shires can use to address local priorities, are paid and distributed via state and the Northern Territory governments. General purpose funding is supposed to be distributed according to horizontal equalisation so that similar services can be provided in councils around the country for similar investment or effort. But the federal FA grant distribution principles are not enforced or enforceable; states and territories have unfettered power to distribute according to their own priorities. Inquiry submitters called for a review of various components of the program. Local governments are in dire straits, especially in regional Australia.

I call on Minister Catherine King to refer the matter to the committee afresh, to continue the unfinished inquiry, and let it deliver a final report for the sake of the 537 councils and shires around the country.

Andrew Wilkie (Clark, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Is the motion seconded?

Henry Pike (Bowman, Liberal National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I second the motion and reserve my right to speak.

Ash Ambihaipahar (Barton, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on this particular motion tonight and thank the member for Mallee for bringing this matter forward. As the newly elected member for the seat of Barton, I appreciate the opportunity to make a contribution to this debate, particularly given my own experience in local government. Before entering parliament, I proudly served as a councillor on Georges River Council, which covers a portion of my electorate. I recently resigned from that position due to my new role here in this place, to ensure that this role gets the attention and focus it deserves and that the community of the ward I was representing on Georges River Council will have a councillor that can focus on the needs and issues that arise there.

My time in local government has given me a deep understanding of the challenges councils face on the ground, from road maintenance, waste collection and community services to strategic planning. While I understand this motion specifically highlights issues facing our regions, I want to emphasise that local government—regional, rural and metropolitan—is the closest level of government to our communities and that that proximity is absolutely vital. Having worked closely with some of my regional councillor colleagues and communities, I recognise the unique shared challenges across all jurisdictions, particularly around constraints with funding, growing service expectations and ageing infrastructure.

That's why the Albanese Labor government is committed to supporting a robust and sustainable local government sector. One of the first acts in the last parliament, it is my understanding, was to refer the matter of local government financial sustainability to the House Standing Committee on Regional Development, Infrastructure and Transport. This was the first inquiry of its kind, it is my understanding, in over 20 years; it was very much long overdue. The interim report my colleague mentioned here tonight was released earlier this year, in February 2025, reflecting the depth of concern and engagement across the sector. My understanding is there were over 280 written submissions and 16 public hearings. The finding of this particular report is very clear: the role of local government has grown dramatically and the funding model needs to evolve accordingly. As members will know, the inquiry was put on hold due to the federal election. In line with parliamentary practice, the previous committee lapsed, but we have committed to re-establishing it. My understanding is that consultation is currently underway to determine some sort of timing and, once the committee resumes, the government will again be referring this inquiry to ensure that its vital work continues, because we understand what's at stake.

We've reinstated the Australian Council of Local Government to put local priorities back on the national stage. We've backed that commitment with investment of $3.3 billion in financial assistance grants this year alone. We're doubling the Roads to Recovery Program to $1 billion annually over five years and we've boosted the Black Spot Program to $150 million a year. We've merged several infrastructure programs into the $200 million Safer Local Roads and Infrastructure Program, and there's plenty more. This isn't just talk; it's real money. It is about targeting real solutions for our local needs.

I also need to highlight the contrast with those opposite. When the coalition were in government, they froze the indexation of financial assistance grants, ripping nearly a billion dollars away from councils. They abolished the Australia Council of Local Government and ignored local voices for a decade. They claim to support regional Australia but delivered pork-barrelled press releases instead of actual infrastructure. The last time I checked, we can't build roads with press releases.

We've invested $33 billion in housing initiatives, including support for social and affordable housing and expanding the Help to Buy scheme. We're making TAFE free and expanding university access throughout the regional hubs. We're backing apprentices with a $10,000 incentive. We've strengthened Medicare and delivered 87 urgent care clinics—31 in regional Australia—and much, much more, which my colleague will speak on tonight.

Labor governs for all Australians, whether they live in our inner cities and outer suburbs or in the far-flung regional towns, because postcodes should never limit potential. We're building a future where local government is not just heard but supported, where the regions are not just remembered but respected and where communities are not just surviving but thriving. (Time expired)

Henry Pike (Bowman, Liberal National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the member for Mallee for bringing forward this excellent motion. I think the start of a new parliamentary term is an important opportunity for us to send a strong message to the government that this is a pressing issue, as the minister stated at the start of this process 14 months ago. It is long overdue that we had a proper look at this. It was very good that the committee undertook this inquiry into local government's financial sustainability last term, and it's unfortunate that, given the short nature of our parliamentary terms, it wasn't completed satisfactorily. I thought that, in my comments today, I might underscore those points and also use this opportunity to explain what this actually means for the people out there, particularly the people in my electorate of Bowman.

We've just gone through the season of budget setting and unfortunately, for a lot of Queensland local governments, we've seen a lot of rate rises throughout local governments in Queensland, including in the Redland City Council in my electorate of Bowman. The Redland City Council handed down its latest budget in June, and for my local residents it has certainly hit hard. We've seen a minimum general rate increase of 7.89 per cent and an 11 per cent increase in fees and charges, and that's on top of all the other increases that people are facing at the supermarket, at the bowser and with household bills of every variety.

It's easy, of course, for local residents to blame their local council and point the finger, saying, 'Ah, you're upping my rates! This is terrible. Take better care of our money.' But when you look at the scale of the cost shifting that has happened in local government across this country, you see it's not just in regional communities, such as those the member for Mallee represents. In every community in this country we are seeing federal government in rapid retreat from financial support for local governments, and ultimately it's the ratepayer—the end user—who's paying the cost for it. We need to be entirely honest about why this is happening, and I think an inquiry, or a reheating of this inquiry, to get to the bottom of it and have some actual recommendations would certainly be worthwhile. The question has to be asked as to why councillors are having to take these steps. In Queensland, in particular, we've seen huge rate increases. Unfortunately, this inquiry, in the course of the last term, only achieved an interim report. It offered no recommendations, and we need to really send a strong message that we want to have this committee look into this again and come up with some serious answers and recommendations.

I've got quite an interesting and unique situation in this parliament—

I think I do, Member for Groom. In fact, you might be fairly similar, but I think you're just on the outside of it. I represent an electorate that has one local government area—no overlap, no leftovers.

An honourable member: Three!

Three! I'd hate to think how many some of my colleagues have, but I have one local government area—perfectly aligns. Unfortunately, I think we may have a redistribution in Queensland at the next election. I may have to gain or lose a little bit—who knows!—but, hopefully, I can keep it exactly the way it is. It means that I've got a very strong relationship with my council, and I'm very closely in contact with my local councillors and can find out the impact of all these cuts. Unfortunately, in the life of the first term of this government, we saw a lot cut from the Redland City Council's bottom line. I'm just using this as an example. I'm sure there are similar stories across the country.

The federal government cut $13 million from the local roads and community infrastructure fund which was going to the Redlands. This money was earmarked for upgrading local streets, footpaths and community spaces, and now it's gone. We've had mentioned already the impact of the financial assistance grants and how they're not keeping in line with the total—

An honourable member interjecting—

The member may recall that I perhaps wasn't here in the early stages of the previous government, but he may be mistaking his memory. An unfair note from my local government in particular is the cutting of the native title respondent funding scheme. We've got 3½ thousand council owned lots in my electorate which are subject to a native title claim, and it's a significant cost on our council budget to have to respond to those claims. We've got a hearing coming up in September and we were hoping to get some federal government support on that cost, and unfortunately that was cut. It's another area of this endless from funding local governments that we're seeing from the current federal government. So I strongly support the motion and I hope that the committee will undertake that action. (Time expired)

Lisa Chesters (Bendigo, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak in relation to this motion, and I have to say I'm a little bit disappointed that the member for Mallee was not a little bit stronger in her motion which calls for reviews and 'looking at'. Where's the demand? Where's the demand to do more for regional councils? As a member who represents a regional electorate—and I have five local government areas. I've got the City of Greater Bendigo and the whole of the Mount Alexander Shire Council. I've got a little bit of Mitchell, a little bit of Campaspe and a little bit of the Macedon Ranges. What these regional shires all have in common is that they are struggling. They are struggling to meet the cost of delivering the services that our community requires, and that struggle, with regard to financial assistance grants, goes all the way back to former prime minister Tony Abbott and what he did to financial assistance grants in his disastrous budget of 2014.

Tony Abbott and Joe Hockey, in their first budget, froze financial assistance grant indexation. That compounding impact is why we're in the mess we are today when it comes to financial assistance grants. Whilst I appreciate the energy in which the Australian Council of Local Government have just said to us, 'Lift them back to one per cent'— I appreciate that, but I say to the Local Government Association that it cannot just be a straight blanket increase to the current formula. The current formula is not achieving its objectives. Its objectives are about financial assistance grants, and let's be blunt—there are some council areas in Australia who do not need financial assistance. The City of Melbourne comes to mind, as well as a number of other inner-city councils that can make more money through parking metres in an hour than what some of our shires in Australia can make collecting rates. This is why we need to review how the financial assistance grants are rolled out, and it needs to be done urgently.

So I say to the member for Mallee: be bolder, be a bit stronger, stand up a bit more for your regional councils and argue for what should be in that formula, because right now we have a local government association who are just saying 'increase' but are not suggesting where that extra funding should go. In my opinion, the financial assistance grants needs to be reprioritised and focused on regional councils, where they have smaller rate bases, larger geographical areas and challenges that some of the metro partners do not have.

In our regions, local governments are quite often responsible for delivering aged-care services, like in my shire of Mount Alexander, or early childhood education services, like in the city of Bendigo. And, whilst they are not the lone providers of early childhood education services, they do provide a benchmark—good-quality early childhood education—that the for-profit sector is forced to compete with, and they have a waitlist. I would like to see them expand their early childhood education offerings, and maybe, if we can get the financial assistance grants correct, they can.

Another shire of mine, the Mount Alexander shire, has more bridges than any other shire in the state of Victoria, and they are constantly looking for ways to upgrade and update their bridges. I was very proud to join them last year and stand with them when they allocated some of their federal funding to fixing one of these many bridges, connecting the community so that they didn't have to literally drive through old McDonald's farm to get to town. These are the daily challenges that local governments face.

Quite often in regional areas, local government is the largest employer. They have the good, secure jobs that support so many in their communities. Not only are they the deliverers of important services but they also have the good jobs.

The other thing that our local governments do is partner with us to deliver funding, and I have to say that, during the last term of our government, the councils in my electorate received more funding in that one term than they did in the entire previous nine years of the coalition. Mount Alexander shire received over $12 million for the redevelopment of one of their precincts. Local governments received funding to restore waterways and from Roads to Recovery and to build vital community infrastructure projects and female change rooms, just to name a few examples. Do not believe the rhetoric and the nonsense of those opposite, because that's all it is.

Garth Hamilton (Groom, Liberal National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I think this is a very important topic to be talking about. I'm not sure that what Tony Abbott did 14 years ago matters a pinch to any single man—

No, you've had three years, Member for Blair. If it mattered so much, you could have dealt with it, and that's the truth. I'm not going to go down this pathway. I think you're absolutely in the wrong place if that's the argument you're going to put on the table.

You know what? I'll stay on the Tony Abbott theme. In 2013, Tony Abbott got off to a very good start when he talked about having a look at the federation model and how all three levels of government work together. I think it's a really good topic for us to explore because at the heart of this problem is how we find ways to make sure councils like the Toowoomba Regional Council and those within the footprints of the members for Blair and Kooyong have the adequate funding to deliver the services that Australians expect.

We went back 14 years; I'll go back a little bit further, to 1942, when, at the federal level, we took over responsibility for income tax from the states. Ever since then, we have seen a lot of different approaches to how we get that funding down to the local communities who need it. I would argue that today we have a situation where we have multiple overlapping responsibilities. We have all three levels of government competing for different ways to raise revenue, and what are they doing it for? They're not doing it for themselves. They're doing it to provide services to Australian citizens. It's important that we go back to that fundamental question: how do we ensure that every level of government is adequately funded to do what it's supposed to do? So I will take up the Tony Abbott point. That conversation on how the federation model works today, after all the changes it has been through, is right, and I think our councils want to hear that conversation.

My local council—much like the member for Bowman, I have only one—has just given a 9.5 per cent rate rise. It is struggling, and it's very open about that and about how it continues to raise revenue in ways that are appropriate for regional council. It points out to me regularly when we talk that there are so many different challenges that regional councils face. It's not something special, because they're regional; it's simple mathematics. If you have four-acre blocks, there's a lot more road from doorstep to doorstep. When you start building that further out into the regional communities, where you have large farms—I'm thinking about the feedlots out near Nangwee—the council still has to find ways to fund the maintenance of those roads. After the most recent round of floods, I can assure you there's a lot of work to be done in our area that our council simply does not have the funding to do.

In 2021-22, financial assistance grants to Toowoomba Regional Council were $19 million. This year, they're $5.5 million. I'm not going to throw this over the two sides here. That determination is made by the state government, and I expect the Queensland state LNP government to review that process to make sure that councils like mine get an appropriate share of that funding. At the moment, my argument is that they do not. To drop funding from $19 million to $5.5 million and expect a council to maintain the same standard of service it has provided to the people of the Toowoomba region, I think, is too much to ask. I would point out that, amongst the many costs—and it was raised earlier that costs have been increased across the country—my council has seen a $1.9 million increase in electricity costs in that time period. Not only have we lost funding—from $19 million to $5.5 million—we've had to pay an extra $1.9 million in electricity costs. Councils are struggling.

I can't help but raise another issue. My council has asked me to raise it many, many times. I think it's relevant for this. They're not responsible for upgrading a dam wall at Cressbrook Dam. This is a $275 million piece of work that a local council is supposed to fund. The changes required for that were put in place by the state government quite some time ago. The impact on this council of having to maintain that piece of infrastructure has the ability to absolutely drive them bankrupt. That's the scary situation we're in. No-one wants to see that. Why is that situation in place? There's a long history to it, but it goes back to my fundamental point: how the federal model works needs to be reviewed, because, for a regional council to have to find $275 million to upgrade a dam wall clearly shows we're in the wrong place.

Andrew Wilkie (Clark, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Before I give the call to the member for Calare, I just remind honourable members that your remarks are directed to the chair, so it's improper to refer to another member as 'you', because that would be taken to be—me! So that's in the spirit of continuous improvement.

Shayne Neumann (Blair, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The problem with the motion from the member for Mallee, the comments from the member for Bowman and the comments from the member for Groom is this: they want to look at the current situation but ignore the long history of the failure of successive coalition governments in the area of supporting local government. Who can forget the 12,000-page, three-volume audit, by the Auditor-General in the ANAO reports, of the former coalition government under John Howard and its discredited regional partnerships program which found that one-third of funding went to just 10 coalition electorates. That came out, by the way, in July 2010.

Then, of course, we brought in the regional and local community infrastructure program. We responded to the global financial crisis, and our nation built the economic stimulus plan, which those opposite in large part didn't support. It was a $550 million investment in community infrastructure focusing on local government. In my area—during that time I was the federal MP—got much-needed support for local government. We got upgrades, for example, to the Ipswich Civic Centre and a whole range of other upgrade projects, including the Condensery project for an art gallery up in the Somerset region. There are just so many I could list, but I won't.

The coalition gets in in 2013. They don't want to know about this. But Joe Hockey, the member for North Sydney at the time, and Mathias Cormann, the finance minister—Tony Abbott was the Prime Minister—froze the indexation of local government payments year after year after year. First, it was three years. Then it went up to 2018-19. The Local Government Association railed against it. Nearly a billion dollars of funding which would have gone into local government in untied financial assistance grants and other programs was stopped. It didn't get there. It wasn't delivered. Those opposite, including the member for Mallee, who brings this motion, would have you believe that they should not even look at that. But that's the history of two coalition governments over two long periods: regional partnerships, rorts and, of course, the failure of three prime ministers—Abbot, Turnbull and Morrison—on indexation. That's egregious failure on local government. So this motion, which talks about reviews and talks about 'looking at' et cetera, fails to address the fact that the coalition has a shocking record in this area.

Now we have a Prime Minister who was the minister for local government during that time I referred to and was dealing with the global financial crisis. We support a strong and sustainable local government sector. We referred the matter of local government financial sustainability to the House of Representatives Standing Committee on Regional Development, Infrastructure and Transport for inquiry. The federal election put the inquiry on hold. The standing committees will be re-established in due course, and I am assured, as a member of government, that there are plans to refer the matter of local government sustainability for inquiry, and I support that. I think that's a terrific idea. I think it's really critical.

We have provided $3.3 billion in direct investment to local government this year through financial assistance grants to ensure councils have ready access to the funds they rely on. We've doubled the Roads to Recovery funding, and I could show, all over my electorate, local projects that are being done. Over the next five years, there will be a billion dollars annually to help local councils in long-term maintenance and upgrades to the road network—everything from potholes through to turns that are necessary across the area.

I'm chair of the black spot consultative panel in Queensland. I have seen what projects councils put up, and I know how important road safety projects are in my local community and across my home state of Queensland. We are not doing what the coalition says we're doing. We're streamlining and merging the Heavy Vehicle Safety and Productivity Program and the Bridges Renewal Program into a safer local roads and community infrastructure project program with at least $200 million available every year, providing a $50 million boost.

Those opposite didn't talk about that increased funding. They froze indexation; we increased funding. We did it during the global financial crisis when we brought forward the funding, and we've provided additional funding and brought forward assistance in the financial assistance grants. What did those opposite do? They didn't really support it at all. In fact, they voted against the second tranche in the stimulus package.

In politics, you look at what people do. You don't just look at what people say. The coalition has a shocking record on local government over the last 20 or 30 years.

Helen Haines (Indi, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the member for Mallee for this motion. In the 47th Parliament, I was proud to be a member of the regional development, infrastructure and transport committee and participate in our inquiry into local government sustainability. In Indi, we have nine local governments or councils. They look after communities of all shapes and sizes, from forests to farms, big cities, small villages and everything in between. Since being elected as the Independent member for Indi, I've worked closely with each of them. In addition to twice-yearly roundtables I hold with all the mayors and CEOs of Indi's nine councils and the extensive work my office does with them on the annual Indi budget submission, I'm always on the phone to them or hitting the road to visit their patch. As an MP, I've come to understand that local councils are not just about rates, rubbish and roads. Make no mistake, though; these remain important services.

But as population shifts, community needs shift, resulting in local council services becoming increasingly diverse and complex—health care, aged care, child care, enabling infrastructure for houses, climate adaptation and emergency management to name but a few. Councils are also managing ageing assets that are integral to the wellbeing and general functioning of our communities—bridges, roads, community buildings and more. What I hear time and time again from mayors, councillors and CEOs is that, as the roles and responsibilities of councils have evolved and increased, their budgets have not. More than ever, we are asking councils to do more with less. For regional and rural councils like those in Indi, it's a real challenge to raise revenue through rates and other means. Grants are not always distributed equitably and often require a financial co-contribution that rural councils simply don't have.

As a member of the previous parliament's House of Representative Standing Committee on Regional Development, Infrastructure and Transport, I welcomed this inquiry to examine the financial sustainability and service delivery obligations of local governments. We looked at the changing infrastructure and service delivery role of local councils and the obstacles in delivering this, the trend in attracting and retaining a skilled workforce and the role of the Australian federal government in addressing these issues.

I want to thank my committee colleagues, particularly the committee chair, the member for Solomon, and the deputy chair, the member for Barker, for their engagement, interest and understanding of the issues facing regional communities like mine and for their hard work in putting together the comprehensive interim report. I also want to take this opportunity to thank the secretariat for their guidance, hard work and logistical support.

This 12-month inquiry saw the committee travel across the length and breadth of Australia to hear from local governments. I want to thank everyone who gave evidence and made a written submissions. Indi local councils, including the City of Wodonga, the Rural City of Wangaratta, Mansfield Shire and Indigo Shire, made submissions to the inquiry. Wangaratta and Murrindindi councils gave evidence at a hearing at Wallan, which the committee found incredibly compelling. I thank them for their contribution.

The interim report referred to in the member for Mallee's motion includes invaluable comments that I agree should direct this government in its work in this term of parliament. I will name just three, but there are many more. First, there should be a review of the financial assistance grants program, including whether minimum grants should be restored to one per cent of Commonwealth taxation revenue. This review should also explore ways to improve the delivery of grants, including the requirement of fixed co-contributions and short delivery timeframes. Second, the allocation of grants should be consistent with horizontal equalisation. Contributors to the inquiry recognised the vital role of horizontal equalisation in providing a level playing field, and most describe the current design as failing to achieve that goal. Third, there should be efforts to address skill shortages by increasing programs to improve labour availability, such as incentivising local council workers to relocate to regional, rural and remote areas.

I hope to continue to work collaboratively with the minister and the department to see this report acted upon for the benefit of my communities and for the benefit of all rural, regional and remote Australians, who rely so heavily on their local councils to truly thrive.

Andrew Wilkie (Clark, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

There being no further speakers, the debate is adjourned and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next day of sitting.