Robbie Williams' key to the city award prompts rule overhaul at City of Melbourne
'Something so tremendous and valuable to the City of Melbourne should be not only made in secret, and not only should be made by a few, but it should be actually made by those who are elected.'
Le Liu said decisions of this significance should not be made by Reece and Leighton alone.
'It should be a decision of council so that we have transparency,' he said.
Being given a key to the city is a rare honour, with only 40 awarded in Melbourne's history. Past recipients include Australian icon Olivia Newton-John, philanthropist Dame Elisabeth Murdoch, boxing legend Muhammad Ali and US country singer Dolly Parton.
Williams was the first person in seven years awarded the honour.
Reece said he supported the motion and thanked Le Liu for ensuring more robust processes were put in place.
'The general rule that council will be going forward with is that the more meaningful, symbolic and rare the award, the more robust and considered the decision-making process should be,' Reece said at the meeting on Monday night.
'We do want to ensure that when council does make the decision to give somebody an award, that the community can know that there's been a robust process behind it.'
Reece said this was good governance and something that he strongly supported.
Loading
'I'm excited to explore more use of civic recognition awards over this council term,' he said. 'When Robbie Williams was awarded the keys to the city earlier this year, it was a truly magic moment for this city.'
Councillor Gladys Liu attempted to move an amendment remove the LGBTIQA+ award from the council's Melbourne Awards on the basis that 'the awards should be based on the contributions, the quality of the person, and it should not be based on sexuality'.
Her amendment was supported by councillor Owen Guest but rejected by all other councillors.
Councillor Davydd Griffiths said Liu's proposed amendment was horrible and warned it risked 'unlocking the culture wars here at Town Hall'.
Loading
The council meeting also considered the City of Melbourne's draft budget and $4.5 million of increased funding for bike lanes after the council received more than 1450 submissions from angry cyclists who said Reece had breached his election promise to maintain funding for cycling infrastructure.
Reece said the updated four-year investment meant that the total put in by the city to cycling infrastructure was in line with the council's previous term.
'We've heard loud and clear about the importance of cycling safety, with close to 11 deaths on Melbourne roads from cycling accidents,' Reece said.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
9 News
an hour ago
- 9 News
How a meme could land you in hot water at the US border
Your web browser is no longer supported. To improve your experience update it here It's every traveller's worst fear. You arrive in a new country after a long flight, line up for hours and present your passport – only to be pulled aside by an immigration officer. There have been multiple reports of Australian travellers being refused entry into the United States over seemingly frivolous reasons. There have been multiple reports recently of Australian travellers being refused entry into the US. (Anadolu via Getty Images) Some said they were asked to hand over their phone so officers can downloads its contents. One Norwegian man claimed he was denied because he had an unflattering meme of US Vice President JD Vance on his phone. An Australian writer, Alistair Kitchen, reported last month he was sent home after being interrogated about his blogging on political protests. He later claimed officials found "evidence of drug use" on his phone and he felt coerced into admitting he had tried drugs in the past. The threat of being detained and sent back home now lingers for Australians hoping to holiday in the US. But are immigration officers really ramping up their efforts to stop Australians and other nationalities from entering the US under the Trump administration? Melbourne-based immigration lawyer Sherwin Noorian told US officials are simply flexing a legal muscle that has always existed. Melbourne-based immigration lawyer Sherwin Noorian, principal lawyer of Globalised Pty Ltd. (Supplied) But Noorian said travellers shouldn't feel coerced into admitting prior drug use or their political beliefs to an immigration officer. "The US has very strict controlled substances laws for non-citizens who are travelling to the US, so even admitting to using marijuana once in one's home country… they can use that against the traveller and deny them entry," Noorian explained. "There's a bit of nuance to it and it may not legally stand up, but they can kind of do whatever they want at that point." Noorian's advice is to never "incriminate yourself" if you've never been convicted of anything. He's also noticed an "anecdotal" rise in reported cases of travellers being detained and their phones confiscated. It's always been done, but he posits the theory that immigration officers could now be using an "advanced computing system to scan the devices for anything they deem suspicious or of concern". He also said travellers do have a right to refuse a request to give up their phone, but warns this could result in automatic entry refusal. "It's a condition of entry, so to speak, that you would hand over that device when asked," he added. Noorian said travellers shouldn't feel coerced into admitting prior drug use or their political beliefs to an immigration officer. (Anadolu via Getty Images) Noorian said he is aware of reports that travellers are being turned away at the border over phone content that is critical of the Trump administration, including memes or political posts. He suspects travellers who have been granted an Electronic System for Travel Authorisation (ESTA) visa waiver may be flagged and interrogated at the border for a variety of reasons and sometimes it's not hard to find one that sticks. "That could be used, especially if they're high-profile, as a reason to take someone aside to question them and give them a hard time," he said. "If they're those types of officers who, and not all of them are like this, but some would be looking for people who are against the administration or against what they deem to be the US interest, they would use that as a reason to question someone and begin that interview." A meme alone wouldn't be enough to deny entry, Noorian said. "But through the course of that [interview], they would begin looking for what they can use to build a case to deny entry," he added. Noorian said the ESTA, which most Australians use to enter the US, does not guarantee entry. The first time a traveller is genuinely assessed under an ESTA, he said, is once you land on US soil. "For most people, they wait until they're in the country and then they say, 'OK, we're going to assess you for your eligibility to enter,'" he said. "I think the Smartraveller advice on this is really quite accurate when they say, be aware that the US authorities have a high level of discretion for visa waiver entries. "It means even more for an Australian traveller than someone coming from Canada or the UK." Most Australian travellers enter the US under the ESTA visa waiver. (PA Images via Getty Images) The current Smartraveller advice for Australians travelling to the US warns that "entry requirements are strict". "US authorities have broad powers to decide if you're eligible to enter and may determine that you are inadmissible for any reason under US law," the advice reads. All hope is not lost for a US holiday if you're denied entry under an ESTA, though. Noorian said he's had cases of clients being refused entry but then able to enter the US through a visitor visa obtained via the US consulate. "It's not a lifetime ban, they can reapply, but in this environment, it depends on the circumstances," he added. "If they admitted to drug use, that could be a big problem. "But it can be overcome. We've done that before." US Homeland Security officials have disputed that a Norwegian tourist was denied entry due to a meme and said he was turned away for admitting to drug use. Australia USA US POLITICS Donald Trump Travel immigration law CONTACT US Property News: Sixteen-person rental sparks outrage in US.
The Age
2 hours ago
- The Age
Between Xi and Trump, can PM afford to be ‘relaxed and comfortable'?
If you listened to opposition defence spokesman Angus Taylor this week about it being 239 days since Trump was elected – and still no meeting! – you'd think not only was AUKUS toast but the ANZUS treaty, signed way back in 1951, along with it. Taylor has carried on since May 3 as if he is blissfully unaware of the fact that the election reduced the opposition to just 43 seats in the lower house – fewer than the 49 MPs Labor had after Howard's 1996 landslide. Loading When parliament finally resumes on July 22 and some Labor MPs have to sit on the opposition benches (because of the size of Albanese's majority), Taylor and some fellow travellers might finally take a breath and confront the scale of Australians' verdict. Is there actually any doubt that a Trump meeting will happen at some point in the next few months? No. But Taylor and other members of the opposition, such as trade spokesman Kevin Hogan, are sounding the alarm because of AUKUS and tariffs. Hogan toughened his language this week on the urgency of a Trump meeting. Uncertainty over AUKUS is real, given the US administration's review of the deal, under which Australia would buy nuclear-powered submarines. The imposition of 10 per cent tariffs on Australian exports, and the looming re-imposition (after a pause) of 50 per cent tariffs on Australian steel and aluminium exports, is a genuine concern. Though the tone and pitch may be wrong, it is reasonable for the opposition to question whether Albanese's current approach to Trump is sufficient. Will the US administration be wowed by Albanese meeting Xi? Will it want to hear from Albanese, as the leader of a G20 power? Or will it view the Albanese-Xi meeting as a black mark, some sort of snub, a sign that the prime minister has his priorities wrong? The likelihood is that Trump, who sees China as America's primary geopolitical and economic rival, will want to know what Albanese and Xi discussed. And he will want to glean from Albanese what he can about Xi's view of the world. Loading It's worth noting how Albanese's approach to the on-again-off-again meeting with the US president signposts how he plans to govern in the term ahead, with an expanded caucus, a potentially more pliable Senate, and at least as much personal authority as Howard had in 1996. This is a stubborn prime minister who does not want to be rushed. Over and over again, he tells colleagues his approach this term, as it was last term, is to be calm, methodical and orderly. He will not be spooked by the 24-hour news cycle, he will be consistent, he will explain to the Australian people what he plans to do and then do it, but no more. During the last term, Albanese's methodical approach meant that, at times, his government looked slow and reactive. Those hoping that a bold, reforming PM is about to emerge will be disappointed. But Albanese's instinct to slow things down is better suited to his improved position in parliament. He will wear the inevitable, occasional outbreak of dissent, knowing that he governs from a position of strength, backed by a majority Left-faction caucus (for the first time in about five decades), and knowing he has no clear successor, only a coterie of jostling and ambitious ministers. That majority Left faction in caucus will probably push Albanese to go further than his instincts might allow for, such as on pushing Australia to adopt a more ambitious 2035 emissions-reduction target, or on raising the rate of unemployment payments. And there are more than a few members of Albanese's own faction, and of the Right faction too, who are not exactly big fans of the US president and are quite fine with their man not rushing to embrace him. But there is a difference between being chummy with the current occupant of the Oval Office and being a close ally of the United States, as the prime minister knows. If the US review of the AUKUS deal suggests, for example, that the sale of Virginia-class subs to Australia should be delayed or cancelled, then all hell could break loose politically for Albanese and his 'all in due course' approach to Trump would be judged a failure. His decision not to head to the NATO meeting last week, for example, would be deemed a mistake, and the timing of his trip to Beijing would be questioned.
The Age
2 hours ago
- The Age
Australians believe influencers peddle misinformation. So why are they so popular?
The research forms part of the annual Digital News Report compiled by the University of Canberra's News and Media Research Centre and part of an international annual survey led by the Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism. The study surveyed more than 100,000 people worldwide, of whom 2006 were Australian. In the United States, where podcasters Joe Rogan and Theo Von played a major role in the election of Donald Trump, politicians are considered the main misinformation threat. Loading While younger Australians consume news on social platforms due to the convenience of different formats, the report's author, Sora Park from the University of Canberra, says they are aware of potential shortcomings of news coming from less trusted or verified sources. 'While they rely on these influencers, they also know that sometimes they're not accurate, and that mostly they're not journalists,' Park says. But they value, and actively seek, a perspective in their news, says Park, with the research showing older audiences value truth and accuracy in reporting at almost twice the rate of those aged under 35. Platforms such as TikTok, Instagram and YouTube are at the heart of the evolution of the traditional newsroom, says Nathan Powell, chief product and strategy officer at influencer marketing and data firm Fabulate. Trust is no longer earned through a press badge, says Powell, but rather through personality, consistency and perceived authenticity. 'The lines are blurring between journalist, commentator and entertainer, and that evolution is redefining how news is delivered and who gets to deliver it,' Powell says. Loading This year's election signalled the arrival of new media, with the Labor government inviting friendly online commentators and influencers into the federal budget lockup for the first time. Phoebe Saintilan-Stocks, founder of woman-focused outlet Missing Perspectives, was part of this 'new media' cohort, and told the report it was a clear signal the government was attuned to the shifts taking place, with new players like herself influential as sources for Gen Z and Millennial audiences. 'The response to us being invited to Canberra, along with a collection of content creators and other 'new media', was totally unexpected — but maybe I was naive. As social-first media, we were made to feel unwelcome and branded as 'influencers' — and the fact that we attended the budget lockup became the story itself in legacy and mainstream media.' The backlash is partly owed to the view that there are few checks and balances to ensure influencers and new media commentators meet the same standards to which traditional press are held. One of Australia's most popular online personalities and podcasters, Abbie Chatfield, was the subject of an Australian Electoral Commission review over her election posts, and whether they should have an authorisation message. Chatfield was cleared of any wrongdoing after the AEC reviewed whether her combined posts with Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and Greens leader Adam Bandt breached electoral laws. However, Park predicts that electoral laws will change in the near future to ensure professional standards are met when considering politically influential material, regardless of its source. 'The trend that social media is a source of news is growing, and [the proportion of] people who only rely on social media will become bigger and bigger, so as that population grows, then definitely there needs to be some consideration about the quality of information that they provide,' Park says. Olympic diver Sam Fricker has a large online audience and has interviewed subjects from across the political spectrum, including then opposition leader Peter Dutton and Labor minister Chris Bowen. During the election cycle, Fricker travelled to Queensland to interview billionaire Clive Palmer, even staying at Palmer's Coolum resort, which was closed to the public at the time. Honesty, integrity, respect and goodwill are the most important values to uphold for creators, says Fricker, who says he stays neutral in all interviews, but was pressed in the lead-up to the election to disclose his own politics. 'When I've had political guests on, I've made a real effort to stay neutral. I've asked them all very similar questions, and the tone always comes from a place of curiosity and respect. I've never taken sides or tried to influence any vote, that's not what I'm about.' Most prominent online commentators now openly speak from a partisan perspective. During an 'influencer debate' organised by SBS' The Feed, six political commentators were placed in a room together ahead of the election and each was introduced and their political leaning disclosed. Chatfield was sold as a Greens voter, Cheek Media's Hannah Ferguson as a Greens member and teal supporter, and Freya Leach, a popular conservative online personality, as a Liberal Party member. Loading While the outcome was not a level-headed debate, it made compelling viewing, with young audiences increasingly seeking out news and personalities with a perspective that aligns with their own. Influencers being upfront with their politics resonates with their audiences, says Park. With disinformation rife across the media and social platforms, Cheek Media's Ferguson says regulation and accountability are crucial to ensure Australians are consuming news they can trust.
