Tasmania’s councils could soon look very different, with a bold plan on the table that would cut dozens of elected positions.
The proposal has sparked debate over whether fewer councillors mean stronger voices—or less democracy.
At the same time, councillors would be handed a pay rise, a move the government insisted would come at no extra cost to ratepayers.
A new discussion paper released by the Tasmanian government on 15 September outlined plans to slash councillor numbers by 23 per cent, reducing the statewide total from 263 to 203.
Under the model, councils would be streamlined to five, seven or nine councillors depending on their size and complexity.
Local Government Minister Kerry Vincent said the changes would ‘deliver more effective representation and fairer councillor pay’.
He said councillors’ roles had become increasingly complex and must be fairly recognised to attract skilled representatives.
‘We believe this would deliver a fair, appropriate, and cost-neutral pay increase for councillors.’
‘Having the right number of councillors in a local government area is critical to ensuring effective governance, representation and service delivery.’
Tasmania currently had the second-highest number of councillors per capita, with one elected member for every 2,120 residents.
That figure would rise to 2,746 residents per councillor under the proposal, putting Tasmania behind the Northern Territory and Western Australia.
Five of the state’s largest councils—Clarence, Hobart, Launceston, Glenorchy and Kingborough—would have nine councillors each, while five of the smallest—Central Highlands, West Coast, Flinders Island, King Island and Tasman—would be reduced to five.
The steepest cuts would hit Central Highlands, West Coast and King Island, each dropping from nine councillors to five.
The changes were set to take effect from the next local government elections in October 2026.
Pay rates would also be tied to council size, with Clarence, Hobart and Launceston councillors receiving $51,366 each—Clarence recording the largest jump at 41.12 per cent.
Meanwhile, the smallest councils would pay their five members $15,064 each.
Clarence Mayor Brendan Blomeley, a supporter of council amalgamations, said there was ‘no question there are too many elected members at a local government level’.
‘I think it’s a step in the right direction.’
He said nine councillors would be manageable for Clarence, Launceston and Hobart, but other councils would make their own submissions.
He argued pay rises were necessary to reflect the increasing demands of the role.
Local Government Association President Mick Tucker agreed, saying the proposal would be ‘completely and warmly welcomed’ across the state.
‘We need to understand the contemporary view on councils across the board is there are too many councils, too many councillors, and we also know that councillors are screaming out for more remuneration.’
‘This is an area where the government threaded the needle, and they’ve done a really good job.’
He said modern councillors managed issues and budgets worth tens of millions of dollars, yet their allowances had not kept pace with responsibilities.
Cr Tucker added the cuts would reduce the number of candidates elected on small vote counts, which he believed strengthened democracy.
‘Let’s be honest, this is about people having to work hard to get elected because the community really supports them and the community will speak.’
Public submissions on the proposal close on 7 November.
What This Means For You
The Tasmanian government has put forward a proposal to cut councillors by 23 per cent while also increasing allowances, with pay set according to the size of each council. Under the plan, Clarence, Hobart and Launceston councillors would be among the highest paid, receiving $51,366 each. These changes are expected to take effect from the October 2026 local elections.
For older Tasmanians, this could mean seeing fewer local representatives making decisions on community services—yet those who remain will be paid more to do the job. It raises the question: will fewer councillors lead to stronger voices in council chambers, or will it make it harder for seniors to have their concerns heard?
Changes to council structures often spark questions about whether communities will still receive the support and services they need.
Concerns about access to essential care highlight how policy decisions at every level of government can directly affect daily life.
One recent example sheds light on how delays and shortfalls in support are leaving many people waiting for help they urgently require.
Read more: Thousands of seniors face long delays for government home care support
Would fewer councillors strengthen local democracy—or silence community voices?
.png){kind=icon}
