"FarmI" ask@itshall be given wrote in
:

"Troppo" wrote in message
"FarmI" ask@itshall be given wrote in
:

[snip]

Councils cannot "legislate" to do anything. George got it wrong.

They can - through Planning Schemes and Local Laws

Well it's interesting to learn something new.

I know that my local government has no-one on staff who could possibly
draft legislation, (they have enough trouble writing a simple letter
to ratepayers that is written in comprehensible English, let alone
something as complex as legislation). I've never heard of them doing
anything but "regulating". And come to think of it I've never heard of
our Council either drafting a law or seeking Royal Assent for any
piece of Legislation.

How do Councils go about this? Is there some sort of "Legislation
Drafting for Councils" service that they contract to when they require
"legislation"? And how is this enacted into Law? By that I mean what
is the process? I understand what happens at State and Federal level
but obviously Local Authorities "legislating" must have passed me by
entirely.

Ok. In Queensland:
Local Laws can be made under the Local Government Act. Procedure involves
drafting the Law, testing for "public interest" and "competitive
neutrality" issues, public notification, considering submissions, resolving
to make the Law, submitting to Department of Local Government. Once the Law
is published in the State Government Gazette, then its law.
Restraints: can't make a law if the subject is already covered under State
legislation, and can't alter State legislation.
Usually needs legal advice, and must comply with legal drafting standards.
I have written one. In no hurry to write any more.
A Plannng Scheme is also a law, once its gazetted. Similar restraint rules,
eg may not contadict a State law, eg override the building assessment
provisions - although some LAs have got away with this. Possibly due to
lack of attention at the "State Interest Check" stage or maybe political
leverage.


It would make more sense for all Councils Australia-wide to levy
water rates at a high rate on anyone with land of more than an
eighth of an acre

And get voted out of office at the next LG election.

Ha! You assume that people care about what happens at a local level!
If the people of Oz have failed to notice the truly appallling things
that have been happening at a Federal level for the past 11 years, and
that they are only now waking up to the lies they have been told ad
finitum, it seems a bit much to think that they'd notice at a local
level.

Well - we live in a plural society. The local level is all that some people
care about.
Speaking as a "stranger in a strange land", I do notice a high level of
apathy and a lack of protest, compared to some other countries I have lived
in. Not that I would want to return to any of those ...

I try to follow our local stuff but even I can't get fixed in my head
the difference between 2 particular councillors with similar sounding
names and it's important that I do so for our next lot of elections.
One is a right mongrel and should be shot at dawn because of his
knowing environmental destruction and the other is simply a drone,
inoffensive and probably ineffectual but not deliberately and
knowingly destructive.

Sounds like you've got them taped :-) Perhaps my lot aren't too bad. Mostly
"National" Party but with a small 'n'. The last LA I worked for were all
communists, but were very similar to my present lot - apart from the use of
the term 'comrade' and singing 'The Red Flag' before Council meetings :-)
I find that the characteristics of the species are more significant than
politics.


Eighth of an acre =
500m2 = maybe 80% of properties around here.

Not round here, but how many properties it applies to is not relevent.
We live in the driest inhabited continent on earth and most of the
people (especially those in high density areas) think that water is
both a right and available at the turn of a tap. Neither view makes
sense in this land.

and at the same time fast-track applications to approve the
installation of water tanks for use as domestic water.

As previuosly advised, not cost-effective in most areas - unless
(maybe) the water supply is actually running out.

Yep! Many of the areas round me are doing just that (or have been
till recent rains saved their bacon - town of 25K with months of water
left and counting down by the day.

You live in a water rich area, so appreciate it while you have it.

You bet. The last three years the average rainfall (around 980mm) has been
lower than the long-term average (1120mm). On the other hand the capacity
of the local dam is currently being increased, and there's a connection to
Burdekin Falls.

live in an area with supposedly "reliable rainfall". The last 10 years
have not been like that. In fact the last time we had really good
water (subsoil and surface) was in 1988. Currently we are getting
wonderful rain but given the time it will take to get to subsoil
level, I'd like to see it rain for the next 5 years at least 2 days a
week.

In most areas of Queensland tanks do not require a permit unless they
are on a stand or greater than 2.4m in height.

That makes sense. Most NSW Coucils that I know of seem to require
approval. Presumably because of changes required to plumbing or storm
water or somesuch.

Ditto here if regulated plumbing work is involved, eg connecting to toilet
flush and cold feed to washing machine.

Supplying and maintaining water storage and delivery is an expensive
business.

Standard rate here is around $0.50 per kL

Please reread my sentence. I was not talking about the cost of water.
I was talking about the infrastructure that Councils need to supply,
store and provide water to ratepayers in those communities where they
do so. And in most areas the population is still growing as the
infrastructure is getting increasingly archaic and needs servicing,
renewing, upgrading.

So why isn't this factored into the supply rate, and the Headworks charges
on new development? Like it is here?
Seems to me that there are large areas in Oz where no one was paying any
attention to supply/demand modelling and monitoring.

[snip]
The trend is to sell off assets that look good at the time but are
going to be a problem later. Difficult to sell something that has
already failed (eg SEQ water supply).

Hmmmmm. Now if you go back to what I wrote before................ If
all dwellings in SEQ on more than an eighth of an acre had domestic
water tanks, water probably would not be a problem for them. They
might have to watch their usage but that would be a good thing. They
might learn that water doesn't come out of taps.

If the rain still falls throughout the year? yes.
Here the significant falls are from cyclones, rain depressions and monsoon
troughs, mostly in the summer. Very little other times. Except this year
when there was 111mm in June, when it would not have been unusual to have
none.