Politicians and public service employment--a study of the experiences and preferences of NSW Australia local government councillors.

Spooner, Keri ; Haidar, Ali

INTRODUCTION

A strong tradition exists in the constitutional theory of the Westminster style parliamentary government that appointed officials should be separated from the elected officials. There are two interrelated elements in this ideal. Politicians must not have any role in the employment matters of public servants and second politicians must not be allowed to influence public servants as they carry out their tasks. In accordance with this ideal, elected politicians formulate policies, and public servants provide advice and implement policies. In order to ensure that public servants are able to provide neutral advice and implement policies in accordance with law, politicians must be kept away from employment matters of public servants. Ideally, the employment of public servants is managed by constitutionally instituted bodies that are above political influence (Spann 1973).

In practice, this ideal has not always been achieved in the local government of New South Wales (NSW) Australia. Since its inception, the employment matters of council staff was always politicised, and under the current NSW Local Government Act (1993) councilors--elected officials--appoint the general manager who in turn appoints other senior staff in consultation with the council. The Act, in addition, has separated councillors from the council staff in terms of their roles and made the latter quite independent of the former. The councillors formulate strategies; policies of the council, and ensure accountability of the council staff. The council staffs provide advice to councillors and implement council policies. These changes were introduced to the NSW local government more than two decades ago but quite surprisingly there is hardly any serious research that examined:

* What is the extent of councillor influence on the employment matters of the council staff, and

* What is the level of influence councillors prefer to have over the employment matters of council staff?

This study fills the gap in our understanding by addressing these two abovementioned questions. This paper begins with a brief description of NSW local government and then proceeds to describe the method of data collection; the profile of respondents, and the findings of this study. The paper concludes with a discussion section that provides an explanation of the findings.

NSW LOCAL GOVERNMENT

NSW local government is worth $89 billion in assets and infrastructure which brings well over $9 billion into the NSW economy every year and employs more than 50,000 people (Division of Local Government 2012, 6).

Local government in NSW is an elected system of government where between five and fifteen elected councillors hold office as 'the council' for four years. Each local government unit is a statutory corporation and provides a range of socio-economic services for a defined geographic jurisdiction. Councillors are expected to represent community views on council; provide leadership, and ensure local needs are met (Division of Local Government 2008a. 5-13). Councils are headed by mayors who can 'either be popularly elected for a four year term or they can be elected by the councillors for a 12 month term' (Division of Local Government 2008b, 33). Councils, in Australia, traditionally are viewed as non-political, and continuing with tradition, many candidates stand for elections as 'Independents' but many others affiliate themselves with a registered political party (Division of Local Government 2008a, 34).

Under the Local Government Act 1919, it was the councillors who appointed staff at such senior positions as the council clerk and council engineer. The only limiting condition, however, was that applicants for the positions were required to have a prescribed qualification (s. 88). Under the current Local Government Act 1993, even this condition has been removed. Councillors are free to appoint anyone at the most senior position, that of the general manager, so long as the candidate fulfils the job requirements and the appointment is made based on merit after state-wide advertising (s.348). General managers, in turn, appoint other council staff but they must consult the council when they appoint or dismiss other council staff (s.337). General managers and other senior staff are appointed on performance based contracts for the maximum period of five years (s.338).

The general manager, with the support of the council staff, implements council policies, assists council to develop its strategic direction and ensures that 'councillors are provided with information and the advice they require in order to make informed decisions and to carry out their civic duties' (Division of Local Government 2011, 10)

The current Act has attempted to make the staff independent of the council in terms of their tasks. Section 352, for example, clearly states that 'A member of staff of a council is not subject to direction by the council or by a councillor as to the content of any advice or recommendation made by the member'. While all council staff have a duty to carry out council decisions they are responsible to the general manager, not the councillors. Individual councillors cannot direct staff in their day-to-day activities. (Division of Local Government 2008a.14)

A publication of the state government of NSW is quite categorical in separating the council staff from the councillors:

Generally, requests for assistance or information should go through the general manager, except where he or she has authorised another council officer to undertake this role. Similarly, if a staff member needs to talk with a councillor or the mayor, approval should be obtained from the general manager or the appropriate authorised officer. Where authority is given to another council officer, it is the general manager's responsibility to monitor, as far as practicable, that the policy is being observed. Individual councillors do not have the right to direct council staff in their day-to-day activities. Councillors must not contact a member of the council staff on council related business unless in accordance with the policy and procedures governing the interaction of councillors and council staff that have been authorised by the council and the general manager. (Division of Local Government 2012, 30)

METHOD OF DATA COLLECTION

In New South Wales, there are 1480 councillors distributed among 152 councils. The number of councillors per council vary from as many as 15 to as few as 6 (Division of Local Government 2014). Data for this study has been collected through an online survey using the Survey Monkey software. All councillors in New South Wales were sent an email informing them of the survey and requesting that they complete it. Councillors were given a reminder after one month of the uploading of the survey. In total 132 completed questionnaires were received amounting to a response rate of almost 9 per cent. This is quite a low response rate and thus the findings should be viewed as indicative only and extreme caution has to be exercised before making generalisations based on this data. Such a low response rate from online surveys is not unusual. Manion and Sumich, (2013a; 2013b) conducted two online surveys. In one they had responses from 357 councillors (Manion & Sumich 2013a) and in the other they had only 91 responses (Manion & Sumich 2013b). We will provide, where possible, data from these two recent surveys conducted by Manion and Sumich (2013a and 2013b). However, we have conducted interviews with seven councillors to increase the validity of the findings. Moreover, we can also state that the responses of NSW councillors support very closely the responses we have, using very similar questionnaire findings, from New Zealand (Haidar, Reid & Spooner 2011) and Victoria Australia (Pullin & Haidar 2004). This similarity of findings across two of the largest states in Australia and across the Tasman in New Zealand further enhances the validity of findings from the current study.

PROFILE OF RESPONDENTS

Of our respondents 62 per cent are in rural councils and the rest belong to urban councils. More than 72 per cent of responses for this study came from councillors who are aged 50 years and over; 66 per cent of respondents were male. A little over 48 per cent of the responses came from councillors with more than seven years' experience and 43 per cent of the responses came from councillors with less than one years' experience.

At least in terms of age, our respondents are typical councillors of NSW local government (Division of Local Government 2008b, 7).

RESULTS

The study uses six human resource dimensions as a proxy for senior officer human resource matters. These are recruitment, promotion, staff development, compensation, appeal and dismissal (Stone 1995). Table 1 presents the results of the survey. Experience assesses the responses of councillors about the level of influence they currently have over the employment matters of the senior staff, and 'preferences' presents the responses of councillors regarding the influence they believe they should have over the employment matters of senior staff. The responses of councillors were collected on a five point Likert type scale that ranged from not influential, somewhat influential, influential, very influential, decisive and don't know. For the purpose of simplicity, this paper presents the responses in three categories, not influential, influential and don' know. The 'influential' category included responses in the categories of somewhat influential, influential, very influential and decisive.

Table 1 shows that more than fifty per cent of the councillors believe that they have no influence over any of the dimensions of the employment of the council staff and more than fifty per cent of the councillors would like to have influence over all the dimensions of the employment of council staff. Second, the table above shows that in most dimensions there are gaps between preferences of councillors and their experiences. In most dimensions, it is quite clear that they prefer to have more influence than they currently have. This is particularly stark on two dimensions. Well over 70 per cent of councillors prefer to have influence on the dimensions of renewal of contracts and performance evaluation. This would indicate that they prefer to have control over senior staff after they have already been appointed.

Several questions emerge out of the data presented in Table 1. The NSW Local Government Act 1993 provides councillors with the power to control the employment matters of the council staff. To be precise, councillors have direct legal power over the employment of the general managers while their legal power over other council staff is exercised through the general manager when the latter consults them. However, the majority of councillors do not believe that they have influence over the employment matters of council staff. These findings raise at least two questions. First, why are the majority of councillors saying that they do not have influence over senior staff employment matters? Second, why do they prefer to have influence over senior staff employment matters?

DISCUSSION

There are a number of reasons why councillors believe that they are not very influential. One of the most important reasons behind this belief is the fact many councillors perceive that councils in NSW have become politicised. It is a little surprising to hear this from councillors because government, whether local or national, is politics. However, by politicisation, they mean that councillors are divided along political party lines which they either assume councils were not previously or that councils are not expected to be political. Instead, councillors should represent the 'community'.

This politicisation means that councillors who are not in the group in power have very little influence, as one of the most articulate councillors we have interviewed argues:

   And if you gain power at councils, you gain it either through
   majority outcome that is you get majority of councils, and majority
   alliance outcome which is what we have lately and once you get it
   you take it its winner take all. You take power and then you go
   forward. You might be polite to those councillors that do not have
   power you might incorporate them in conversations. But when it
   comes to it if there is a division, if there is a division of
   ideas, you vote them down and win and go forward. Otherwise you get
   nowhere. That is the point of being a councillor otherwise you
   'wishiwashy' around. Or you do nothing. Or you manipulate behind
   the scene. Pretending in upfront you do nothing and then behind you
   are doing all the things. You must prefer to go through, argue you
   out, vote them down and win and be proud of what you have done.

This type of politicisation is occurring not only when councillors make decisions as a council but most probably also in smaller committees. For example, the Department of Premier and Cabinet instructs that the employment process of General Manager is controlled by a four member selection panel consisting of 'at least the mayor, the deputy mayor, another councillor and, ideally, a suitably qualified person independent of the council' (Department of Premier and Cabinet, Guidelines for the appointment and oversight of general manager 2011, 7). The Department (2011) further advises that councils should form similar committees for the performance reviews of the general managers; 'Performance review panels should comprise the mayor, the deputy mayor, another councillor nominated by council and a councillor nominated by the general manager. The council's governing body may also consider including an independent observer on the panel' (14, see also LGMA, 2007, 3).

It is most likely that the membership of committees is based on political party affiliations. For example, one of the councillors we interviewed quite categorically says; 'Because, I am not in the majority, we are sort of like: Persona non grata. We are tolerated, I suppose. If we were in the majority I think it would be a different thing ... my opinion on matters is not being regarded seriously because I am not the majority council faction'. It is interesting to note that councils have developed vocabulary to describe groups in terms of powers they hold. As another councillor described, councillors with power as the 'controlling council' and those without or less power as 'minority councillors'. Other recent studies also report that 'politically aligned groups have an increasingly influential role in local decision making processes'. (Manion & Sumich 2013a, 5) where minority councillors are increasingly 'marginalised' (Manion & Sumich 2-13a, 44).

One of the motivations of people to run for councillor positions is to provide services to their constituents. As a recent study of NSW local government reports that while 90% of candidates run for council election to contribute to local politics, 82 per cent want to directly influence council decisions and 69 per cent want to resolve problems for individual people in their communities (Manion & Sumich 2013a 16-19). Most councillors have their own views about how they want to achieve this, but a number of policies adopted by councils stand in the way of councillors providing this type of service to their constituents. One councillor articulates the issue in quite detail:

A councillor has dual responsibilities: one is to be responsible for the collective decisions of the council and the other is to be critic and advocate for their elected position. And they are not necessarily compatible. That is the contradiction that occurs. Ultimately the councillor's responsibility is to their elected position not to their organizational position. That is not the case legally as I understand it. Elected role is superseded by the organizational role as they are elected. They are stripped of the elected role when they are elected. That is wrong. It is untenable. They would not in this job if they do not believe some local issues.

Council staff is expected to implement policies adopted by council but they are not always very diligent about implementation. As one councillor says:

   Generally speaking councillors expected that they would do it [and]
   believe that they should do it. But in practice, unless they are
   tracked them ... Generally speaking it is not done unless they are
   kicked ... Things they want, they want to they will do. Things they
   believe fit into their scheme they will do, that would be a
   problem. About four years ago it became so chronic at our council
   that we asked the GM to list every single motion that occurred
   [and] to tell us what the status of all these motions is. It is
   much more to do with; there is no secretariat for councillors.
   Councillors have not facilitation. No secretariat. There are no
   people to do your job, to track. There is a governance section [in
   our council] but that would track it for councillors but they do it
   more as a favour more than anything: There is no servicing.

Not only are there no officers responsible for monitoring the process of council staff implementing council policies but there are policies that stand in the ways of councillors pursuing the process of policy implementation. Another councillor commented on this issue:

   I find it quite difficult that there seems to be a protocol in
   place where the councillors cannot interact with the staff.
   Everything has to go through the GM. That has been drummed into us
   by the department by our GM and to some degree it works against us.
   I have tried to set up a man's shed for years [and] having trouble
   with it. One of the directors does not want to do it. GM does not
   want to spend any money. It is given to someone at a level I am not
   allowed to talk to him. Nothing is happening. I keep reminding the
   GM.

Another study reported that councillors felt that they were only 'figureheads' and that they were 'frustrated by staff not acting on motions directing new policy and actions'. Because decisions are not 'carried out as agreed to' they suggest that; 'Councillors need to make more policy that is direct and enforceable with firm time spans for the officers to comply with. That is democracy'. Based on this the researchers caution that "This actual or perceived diminution of influence and decision making power of Local Government appears to have been a factor in the decision of some representatives not to continue for a further term. Attracting new people will become increasingly difficult if Local Government itself and the role of elected representative are seen to have limited influence on decisions that affect the local community" (Manion & Sumich, 2013b, 43).

CONCLUSION

The employment relationship of NSW council staff has always been politicised and the Local Government Act 1993 has taken it even further and yet councillors do not perceive that they have enough power over council staff. We have argued that this is because councils are politically divided and 'minority councillors' are largely marginalised by 'controlling councillors'. This situation provides a direct contrast to the governmental arrangement at the state and commonwealth levels in Australia where politicians from the same party or a coalition of similar minded political parties form government and remain by and large united vis-a-vis public servants and if necessary can get rid of senior staff who they do not like (Griffiths 2013). NSW local government councillors who are not in the majority party, although they are in 'government', have very little influence and thus quite unsurprisingly prefer to have more power. Second, council regulations have made it enormously difficult for councillors to pursue the implementation of policies by council staff who are perceived to usually drag their feet in implementing council policies. This makes it difficult for most councillors who see their main roles as providing specific services to their constituents. Most councillors are professionals and they become councillors to achieve certain community objectives but our findings suggest that they are quite frustrated and if this situation continues, it is quite likely that they would lose their motivation to contest council elections.

REFERENCES

Division of Local Government, Department of Premier and Cabinet, NSW, (2008b), Candidates And Councillors 2008: Report on the survey of Local Government Elected Members and Candidates for elections held in September 2008, NSW, Sydney, viewed 23 June 2014, http://www.dlg.nsw.gov.au/dlg/dlghome/documents/information/2008%20 Local%20Government%20Election%20Results%20Survey%20Report%20 %20Candidates%20and%20councillors.pdf

Division of Local Government, Department of Premier and Cabinet, NSW, (2008a), Becoming a Councillor, in cooperation with the Local Government Association of NSW and the Shires Association of NSW, Sydney, viewed 23 June 2014, http://www.algwa.org.au/docs/bac.pdf

Division of Local Government, Department of Premier and Cabinet, NSW, (2011) , Guidelines for the Appointment & Oversight of General Managers, Sydney, viewed 25 June 2014, http://www.dlg.nsw.gov.au/dlg/dlghome/documents/Information/Guidelin es%20for%20the%20Appointment%20and%20Qversight%20of%20General% 20Managers.pdf

Division of Local Government, Department of Premier and Cabinet, NSW, (2012), Councillor Handbook, in cooperation with the Local Government Association of NSW and the Shires Association of NSW, Sydney, viewed 23 June 2014, http://www.dlg.nsw.gov.au/dlg/dlghome/documents/information/Councillo r%20Handbook.pdf

Division of Local Government, Department of Premier and Cabinet, NSW, (2014), Local Government Directory--Local Councils, viewed 05 May 2014, http://www.dlg.nsw.gov.au/dlg/dlghome/dlg LocalGovDirectory.asp?index =1&CN=ALL#2047

Griffiths, E. (2013), 'New PM Tony Abbott sacks three public service bosses as first act', ABC News, 19 September, viewed 25 June 2014, http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-09-18/abbott-sacks-three-public-service-bosses-as-first-act/4965690

Haidar, A., Reid, M. & Spooner, K. (2011). 'Politicisation but not responsiveness: Preferences and experiences of New Zealand elected members of local government councils'. Australian Journal of Political Science Vol.46(3) pp. 453-472

Local Government Managers Association, NSW, (2007), Local Government General Manager Performance Management Guidelines, in association with Shires Association of NSW, Sydney, viewed 23 June 2014, http://www.dlg.nsw.gov.au/dlg/dlghome/documents/Information/0752%20Guidelines.pdf

Manion, J. & Sumich, M. (2013a), Influencing Change: Views of elected representatives on leadership, decision making and challenges for Local Government in NSW, written for Local Government NSW, Sydney, Viewed 23 June 2014, http://www.lgnsw.org.au/files/imceuploads/90/Influencing%20Change%20-16%20Sep%202013.pdf (This document is undated. We have decided to date it 2013 in view of the fact that it surveyed councillors in 2012)

Manion, J.& Sumich, M, (2013b), Challenges And Motivators: The study explores the views of former elected representatives on the challenges and motivators for participation in local politics in NSW, written for: Local Government NSW, Sydney, viewed 23 June 2014 http://www.lgnsw.org.au/files/imceuploads/90/Challenges%20and%20Motivators%20- %2023%20%20Sep%202013.pdf (This document is undated. We have decided to date it 2013 in view of the fact that it surveyed councillors in 2012)

New South Wales, Australia, Local Government Act, Act No. 41, 1919, viewed 23 June 2014. http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/num actZlga1919n41209.pdf

New South Wales, Australia, New South Wales Consolidated Acts, Local Government Act 1993, viewed 23 June 2014, http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol act/lga1993182/

Pullin, L. & Haidar A. (2004) 'Councillor expectations and experiences in senior council officer human resource matters: Local government in Victoria', Employment Relations Record, 4 (1) 55-66.

Spann, R.N. & Atkins, R. (1973), Public Administration in Australia, New edn, Government Printer, Sydney.

Stone, R. C. (2013), Managing Human Resources, 4th ed, Milton, Qld: Wiley.

Keri Spooner

Wentworth Institute, Sydney

Ali Haidar

Ritsumeikan Asia Pacific University, Japan

Table 1: Experiences and preferences of NSW councillors regarding
dimensions of council staff employment

HR dimensions     Responses    Not           Do not    Influential
                               influential   know

Appointment       Preference   34.9          0.9       65.1
                  Experience   58.3          5.6       36.1

Promotion         Preference   43.1          2.8       55.9
                  Experience   67.6          5.6       26.4

Disciplinary      Preference   48.6          0.9       51.4
matters           Experience   71.3          4.6       25

Remuneration      Preference   37            1.9       62
                  Experience   62.6          5.6       31.7

Training and      Preference   47.7          0.9       51.4
career Dev.       Experience   62            7.4       31.6

Renewal of        Preference   27.8          1.9       70.4
contract          Experience   56.5          6.5       37.1

Performance       Preference   25.9          0.9       73.1
evaluation        Experience   50.9          4.6       44.4