10/06/2026
This is a copy of the email that I have forwarded (commencing 8/6/26) to residents who have emailed me regarding their disappointment with my decision to support the 2026/27 budget.
MY. REASONS FOR SUPPORTING BUDGET 2026/27
While I may not agree with all components of the budget, I understand the reasons and the context behind the decisions being made. It is not a budget that contains ‘bells & whistles’ expenditure, it is more a ‘nuts & bolts’ budget.
A rating review was conducted in 2025 by Orion Consulting, led by David Spearritt, a project consultant with extensive experience and credibility with local government councils throughout Queensland.
The review was part of Council’s Financial Management Repair Strategy and focussed on a 4 year rating strategy and a rating structure review with recommendations. David presented to and conducted 4 half day workshops with Councillors and the Executive Leadership Team.
There were ample opportunities for Councillors to ask questions, seek clarification and ‘push back’ on proposals, not only during these sessions but at other Council meetings throughout the year and subsequent years. It painted a very clear picture of the Long Term Financial Plan implications if Council continued the path it was travelling.
At the end of this review, it was agreed by Councillors to introduce new rating categories
(NPPR, Transitory Accommodation, Large Commercial Properties and Retirement/Lifestyle Villages) together with a 4 year implementation plan. This was done to smooth out the impacts of any increases whilst also providing time for those affected to manage their future budgeting . The review found that owner occupied residential properties were doing the heavy lifting in terms of rates and charges, commercial and industrial properties were under rated and agricultural properties were making an appropriate contribution.
This review shaped how the 2025/26 budget was formulated and outlined that future budgets needed to be consistent with this approach, to sustain long term financial viability.
I know what I know and I know what I don’t know and, in this instance, I trusted that the information and recommendations provided were in the best interests of residents, in the long term.
The competencies of key people in our Finance Team, namely the General Manager Corporate and Commercial Services, the Financial Operations Manager together with the Chief Executive Officer, is not questioned by me. They are knowledgeable in their fields of expertise and provided information and perspectives to Councillors, that I believe, are accurate and helpful in our decision making.
Budgets need to have a healthy surplus, in the realms of at least 3-5% of recurrent expenditure. The surpluses are what Council uses to pay down debt principal over time, so without surpluses, Council’s debt would increase causing future rate increases. A budget surplus was achieved in 2025-26 and is envisaged to continue in 2026-27.
If you ask the question, “Do you want zero/minimal rate increases?” the answer will always be in the affirmative. With the way of the World at present and into the Future, costs in every sector are increasing at unpredictable rates. Every Councillor during the year had clearly expressed the view to the CEO that we did not want to decrease the quantity or quality of the services provided to our community. In fact, I would go as far as to say that all Councillors desired a higher standard of services.
You can’t maintain or do more, with increasing costs, without an increase in income, or you risk a deficit.
The alternative to the conclusion of the above, is to “Live within your means” and reduce or remove some services currently provided.
So ,what services that are currently provided could be removed or reduced that would be acceptable by our community?
It is all very well for Councillors to gain public accolades for advocating for zero/minimal rates, but nowhere do you see the ‘cutbacks’ required to achieve this, identified.
Cost of living is used extensively in all debates and I agree that it is an issue. Cost of living pressures are caused by the following, which is certainly not an exhaustive list.
- marginal tax rates, Interest rates, excise duty on fuel and alcohol, GST, insurance premiums, stamp duty, electricity costs.
Should local government councils be the target for cost of living pressures solely because of rates and fees and charges?
I have never been known to make decisions in order to be popular. I endeavour to make the right or best decision for the right reasons. Some decisions are made to achieve short term outcomes, while others are made to achieve long term outcomes. An enduring Council that sets rates, fees and changes appropriate for the medium to long term viability, is one that endeavours to spread the burden of costs, equitably and fairly, from year to year. Reducing rates in one year will only result in much higher increases in subsequent years.
I can never please 100% of the people, 100% of the time……..never have……never will.
I knew that my position would not be well received but it did not change my resolve that I am ‘Doing the Right Thing’ to sustain the long term financial and service level viability of the Bundaberg Regional Council.
Regards
Gary
