LLS elections must be improved: NSW Farmers

After the fallout from the LLS election debacle in March, a motion was put to the NSW Farmers conference at Luna Park today to push for the introduction of electronic voting in future LLS elections.

This was due to ballot papers not reaching voters in time to return their votes by the election date.

The motion was put forward by Gordon Turner of the Balranald/Oxley district council, who said the move would give an effective and efficient means of voting.

Mr Turner said the election process was a debacle and it took a week or more for the voting papers to reach ratepayers in his region.

Peter Carter, Wellington questioned whether the focus should actually be on improving the quality of the process, including a proper voting paper with adequate information about the nominees.

The motion that the NSW government implement optional electronic voting in LLS elections was carried.

The conference also voted to ensure each farm title holder be entitled to a vote in LLS elections.

Greg Rodgers of Balranald/Oxley district council said the present LLS Act was “undemocratic” as it restricted title holders to just one vote, regardless of the number of titles they held.

"We need to make sure no title holder is disenfranchised - they pay their rates so they should have a vote," Mr Rodgers said.

He said they were asking for the same deal as under the former Livestock Health and Pest Authority.

NSW Farmers member Sam Archer said this would disadvantage some landholders.

However, Peter Cannon, Peak Hill, disagreed.

"I'm somewhat taken aback by Sam Archer's comments- it was okay then (for the LHPA) so what's changed?"

North Coast delegates raised concersn about the possibility of small landholders over running larger farmers if and when small blocks were made to also pay rates.

Concerns were also raised about absentee landholders who gained voting rights, especially if they owned more than one land title.

However, it was argued if the person owned the land and paid the rates they should be entitled to vote.

The motion was carried.

Concerns were raised about government funding of LLS staff positions, which, if pulled, could see LLS ratepayers cop the cost.

NSW Farmers voted to lobby State government not to pass responsiblity onto LLS boards.

Richard Croft of Uralla District Council said more transparency was needed about which roles were funded by whom, particularly the roles paid for by government.

He said if government funding was cut, the roles that funding supported might become the responsibility of ratepayers.

"We could end up where the only sources of income were rates," he said.

"We certainly wouldn't want to be paying for staff that were originally paid for by the government but had their funds withdrawn."

The Land is reporting from the conference and you can follow the coverage here: