Victorian taxpayers are facing a staggering financial burden, with each byelection to replace a local councillor now costing up to $180,000—a jaw-dropping increase from the mere $1,000 it used to cost. But here's where it gets controversial: this skyrocketing expense is a direct result of the shift to a 'single-member ward' system in local councils, a change that has sparked heated debates and left many questioning its true value. And this is the part most people miss: the unintended consequences of this system are piling up, from unbudgeted costs to declining voter turnout, leaving communities to foot the bill for decisions made without their direct input.
Since the 2024 local council elections, the cost of filling a vacancy has surged more than 100-fold. Recent byelections in Darebin, Whittlesea, and Wodonga have revealed that replacing a single councillor now costs between $130,000 and $180,000. These expenses are a stark contrast to the previous system, where larger wards were represented by multiple councillors, and vacancies were filled through a cost-effective 'countback' of existing votes by the Victorian Electoral Commission (VEC).
Under the new single-member ward structure, however, legislation prevents a countback due to the use of preferential voting. This means a costly byelection is the only option when a vacancy arises. For instance, Whittlesea's August byelection, triggered by a vote-tampering scandal, cost taxpayers $183,537. Another byelection is already on the horizon after Councillor Nic Brooks resigned, citing an overwhelming workload that clashed with his business responsibilities. Brooks admitted the high cost weighed heavily on him, stating, 'It doesn’t seem fair for ratepayers to bear such a burden.'
The financial strain is not limited to Whittlesea. Darebin's byelection following the death of Councillor Gaetano Greco cost $131,327, while Wodonga's byelection after Councillor Hannah Seymour's resignation totaled $140,000. Seymour, who left to be closer to her support network, was unaware of the cost to her community but criticized the lack of direct community consultation in implementing the single-member ward system. She argued, 'The broader consequences for local governance deserve more attention.'
Is it fair for ratepayers to shoulder these expenses, especially when some vacancies result from misconduct or personal choices? Tanya Tescher, secretary of the Victorian Ratepayers and Residents Association, believes not. She advocates for a legislative overhaul to revert to the previous system and suggests that those removed for bad behavior should contribute to the costs.
Adding to the controversy, the single-member ward system has also led to decreased competition in some areas. Across Victoria, 47 candidates secured council seats without a single vote being cast due to a lack of opponents. Meanwhile, voter turnout in byelections has dropped significantly, with Darebin's August byelection seeing a 5.35% decrease compared to the 2024 general election.
The VEC has attempted to minimize costs by scheduling byelections simultaneously, but they acknowledge that byelections are far more resource-intensive than countbacks. A Victorian government spokesperson defended the single-member ward system, claiming it makes councillors 'more accountable to the communities they serve.' But is this accountability worth the price tag?
As Bendigo prepares for its own byelection after Councillor John McIlrath's resignation, the debate rages on. McIlrath, who left to focus on his business, dismissed concerns over the cost, stating, 'Governments don’t care about costs; they just throw it away.' He also highlighted the irony of the single-member ward system, which he claims led to an unmanageable increase in his workload—a stark contrast to the two to four hours a week initially promised.
What do you think? Is the single-member ward system a step forward in local governance, or a costly experiment gone wrong? Share your thoughts in the comments below, and let’s spark a conversation that could shape the future of local democracy in Victoria.
