Once again I find myself in this place talking about Liverpool City Council, because once again it has demonstrated just how dysfunctional and chaotic it has become as an organisation. Over the past week, Liberal councillors Harte and Macnaught hatched a plan to push through mass job cuts and wage reductions that would have slashed services and cost around 140 council workers their jobs. Even more concerning, they sought to do it in secret, with the support of the mayor and away from public scrutiny and community oversight despite there being nothing within the proposed amendments to justify that level of secrecy.
The proposals included massive jobs cuts across parks, planning, development assessment and heritage. Workers faced the prospect of significant wage reductions and widespread job losses. All of this comes at a time when families are already struggling through a cost-of-living crisis, watching mortgage repayments rise, petrol prices fluctuate and grocery bills climb from week to week. While councillors played politics behind closed doors, hundreds of workers were left fearing for their livelihoods, their mortgages and their families' futures. Workers were being asked to pay the price for the mayor and the council's dysfunction, infighting, waste and scandal. Workers responded with understandable shock and concern.
United Services Union members passed a series of motions calling for investigations by the Office of Local Government and ICAC into how councillors Harte and Macnaught allegedly accessed and used confidential operational information in drafting the proposed amendments. Hundreds of workers and residents gathered outside council chambers prior to the meeting to oppose the proposed cuts. Ultimately, the proposal collapsed under community pressure, worker solidarity and opposition from both Labor and Independent councillors. But while workers and the community may feel relieved, we know all too well—especially in this place—that attacks on workers and privatisation are embedded in the DNA of the Liberal Party.
Serious questions remain. How did Liverpool City Council get to a point where proposals of such magnitude could even be brought forward in the first place? How were councillors expected to make informed decisions on sweeping budget changes with such limited time, detail and analysis attached to the motion? Perhaps most extraordinarily, how was newly sworn‑in Councillor Zeli Munjiza expected to properly fulfil her obligations under the Local Government Act after being given less than 24 hours notice? Councillor Munjiza was sworn in a day earlier, on Monday evening, and immediately thrust into one of the most significant budget debates in recent council history. Under section 232 (1) (b) of the Local Government Act, councillors have a responsibility "to make considered and well-informed decisions as a member of the governing body". There is simply no reasonable way that a newly elected councillor with less than 24 hours under their belt could properly meet that obligation under those circumstances.
All this is especially concerning given that the recent public inquiry into Liverpool City Council dealt with many of these exact issues: councillor onboarding and training, inadequate notice for major motions, rushed budget decisions and broader governance failures. But we find ourselves here yet again. The inquiry exposed deep cultural and governance problems within Liverpool City Council. In response, the mayor and council assured residents that lessons would be learned, standards would improve and reforms would follow. But this episode demonstrates the exact opposite. Instead of genuine reform, we have seen little more than window-dressing. Council remains plagued by rushed decision-making, secrecy, instability and political chaos. Instead of restoring confidence, council continues to undermine it.
At some point, the people of Liverpool are entitled to ask a very serious question: Is the council actually capable of reform? Because when an organisation repeatedly finds itself at the centre of governance scandals, public inquiries, internal warfare and failed decision-making, it stops looking like isolated incidents and starts looking like a culture. Liverpool is one of the fastest growing regions in the country. Residents deserve a council focused on delivering basic services, infrastructure and good governance, not endless dysfunction, scandal and self‑inflicted crises. The people of Liverpool deserve transparency, accountability and competent leadership. Most of all, council workers deserve respect, certainty and honesty, not threats, panic, instability, dysfunction and threats to their livelihood.
Mr STEVE WHAN (Monaro—Minister for Skills, TAFE and Tertiary Education) (20:54): Tonight we heard about the concerns the member for Leppington and the member for Liverpool have about things going on with the local councils in their communities. Is it any wonder that Labor scored such a resounding victory in the recent by-election when people in the area can see the quality of representation being delivered to them by their Labor representatives in this place?
