Opinion: Please sir, we want some Moore

Last week the NSW Legislative Assembly voted in favour of The Local Government Amendment (Members of Parliament) Bill 2012, preventing Members of Parliament from holding dual local government roles.

Despite government claims to the contrary, this supposedly benign piece of legislation reveals itself to be little more than a clumsy tool introduced to claim the scalp of a key political opponent – Clover Moore.

Moore has been an outspoken and arguably influential opposition of government planning and infrastructure policy in the immediate Sydney area since her election to the seat of Sydney (previously Bligh) in 1988.

She has since this time earned a reputation as a bulldog in the cutthroat game of land development and town planning within the Sydney Metro area through some of the muddiest, scandal ridden years of state politics.

Irrespective of political persuasion, it is undeniable that she has made it her task as both Member for Sydney and Lord Mayor to acquaint herself intimately with the views of her constituents and represent those views tenaciously, often to the annoyance of more than one incumbent Premier.

Hansard records show that in the last year alone she has spoken in parliament more than all but eight coalition members, asked more questions than all coalition members combined and introduced three private members bills.

It is the exposure and respect engendered by her dual roles that has made her a prime target for the new O’Farrell government and their unique brand of non-politics.

They claim the bill was introduced to combat conflicts of interest within the Parliament, however no provisions were included for the 60 sitting MP’s with private holdings, some of which are with premier property development companies.

They claim that constituents cannot complain to an MP about local council services if they are also their local councillor, however the majority of council complaints are directed through council General Managers and CEO’s, with the most serious going to the Ombudsman or ICAC.

Finally, they claim that the bill brings us into line with other states, however there are many more pressing issues in need of address.

People with disabilities still reside in group accommodation without self-directed funding and our dental care plan is non-existent, unlike most other states.

The only claim in all of this that makes sense is Moore’s: that this bill was a deliberate attempt to silence an outspoken and important voice of dissent within the Legislative Council.

The people of Sydney voted for Clover Moore with the understanding that she would hold her seat until 2015, to deny them their representation subverts the course of democracy and damages the image of the O’Farrell government, which is nobody’s victory.

By Ryan Gleeson