A proposal to have northern Victorian irrigators appointed to G-MW customer committees, rather than elected, is getting pushback from farmers.
Elected committees, called water service committees, hold regular meetings with G-MW staff to discuss water delivery issues and give feedback to senior management.
But a move to have G-MW appoint the committees has raised objections from some of those committees, who fear there may be a tendency to appoint “yes” people.
The irrigators also want to see the committee role maintained as a way of providing direct, informed feedback to G-MW management.
Although there are ostensibly 12 committees, some of the neighbouring irrigation committees have been meeting simultaneously and are almost merged.
Historically, there has not been much competition to serve on the committees and some members have told Country News that while technically elections can be held, there are often insufficient nominations to warrant elections.
And G-MW has the power (and has exercised it occasionally), to disqualify nominations that do not meet certain standards, and in some rare cases has sacked committees it believes were becoming dysfunctional.
Country News interviewed three of the larger water service committee chairs, who all indicated they wanted to see the committees elected.
G-MW said the committee structure had been under review for some time and no decision has been made about changes.
Country News understands the issue will be raised at a board meeting this week.
Central Goulburn chair Peter Hacon wants to see the committees maintained as democratically elected bodies which can give frank feedback to the water authority.
He said G-MW had been reducing the information on the agendas of the committees in recent years.
Mr Hacon said the committees had a role in building social capital for communities, as some committee members went on to join other representative bodies in the region.
Rochester Water Services Committee chairman Richard Anderson said he could appreciate the review being conducted by G-MW and his personal preference was to see committees elected.
He acknowledged it was difficult to get younger irrigators to nominate for seats on the committees.
“You can get them along to a meeting, but if you asked if they wanted to join, the answer is often, ‘no’,” Mr Anderson said.
G-MW managing director Charmaine Quick said in recent years, it had been harder to attract and keep committee members.
“There have also been significant changes to our irrigation network, customer demographics and the services we provide,” she said.
“It is important G-MW adapts how we engage with customers to reflect these changes.
“Since late 2023, G-MW has been in discussions with the water service committee about a new model for the future.
“As a result of these discussions, we are exploring the development of new service-aligned customer committees to replace the existing WSCs.
“These customer committees would reflect our diverse range of customers and be designed to be collaborative, strategic, and with a manageable time commitment for members.”
She did not comment on whether the committees would continue to be elected.
Shepparton Water Service Committee chair Craig Reynolds said it appeared that G-MW was favouring appointed committee members, rather than elections.
“I can understand how that might appear preferable from their point of view, but this is about genuine consultation,” Mr Reynolds said.
“It might be uncomfortable for staff who may be challenged over issues, but (the current arrangements) have worked reasonably well.
“G-MW talks about listening to customer feedback, well, with elected committees they are getting genuine feedback.
“They can’t be accused of setting up committees that will only agree with them.”