Why the 'Members of Parliament Bill' is really the Get Clover Bill

Premier says he is concerned about time management and conflicts of interest but there are TWICE as many MPs with private interests

The 2011 Pecuniary Interest Register shows around double the number of MPs with private interests than those also serving as councillors. Around 60 MPs have private interests which include ongoing involvement or ownership of businesses, investment properties, legal and medical practices and share portfolios. Several MPs are also company directors.

The Premier needs to explain why he is turning a blind eye to this significant issue if he is genuinely concerned about conflicts of interest and time management.

Councillors can see out their term but MPs must resign immediately

If this is not the 'get Clover Bill' then the Premier should let me see out my term as MP like he is allowing Councillors who are elected as MPs to see out their terms.

The Premier's failure to allow current MPs to also finish their term if elected to Council confirms this is politically targeted.

Premier claims no one person can do both roles justice but in a democracy shouldn't the community decide that?

I'm happy for my record to be judged against any other backbench MP. Last year I spoke 53 times, more than all but eight Coalition MPs. On average I made one Private Members Statement every week on an issue important to my electorate - the Premier did not make any.

I asked 104 written questions, more than the number of questions asked by all 69 Coalition MPs combined. I also introduced three private members bills, more than any non-Government member and one of these bills is already law.

No mandate - the Premier didn't campaign on this before the election

In fact he actively campaigned for candidates who were Councillors seeking election as MPs. He led the community to believe they could choose their representative but is now telling them he doesn't agree with their choice by forcing resignations.

Government's own public inquiry shows the community is divided

The Local Government Minister won't publically release the results of his inquiry but says opinion on dual roles was divided equally. A referendum should be held given that this major change reduces a voting right people in NSW have had since 1856 and the Government's own inquiry shows people are divided on the issue.

Premier claims the community expects MPs / Councillors to do one job but 29 communities voted for one person to do both roles
Again let's look at the evidence - at the last election 29 Mayors or Councillors were elected as MPs, 18 from his own side. If the community really thought they couldn't fulfil both roles, they would not have elected them.

Premier says all the other states are doing it

Is the Premier also saying he will follow the lead of other states by:

  • Abolishing the Upper House or adopting the Hare-Clark electorate system (QLD/ TAS)
  • Amalgamating and reducing the number of Councils (QLD & VIC)
  • Privatising Rail Corp (QLD)
  • Introducing a container deposit levy (SA)
  • Seriously funding safe bike infrastructure (VIC & QLD)

Sign Up