A Local-State Government Spatial Data Sharing Partnership

Appendix4 – Open Ended Questionnaire Responses
100 The work that is done at the Council end is very time consuming which then equates to cost
in a council like this with such a small rate base but such a large area to cover. It’s difficult
when you have to drive over 100 km just to get to a site, to then come back to the office and
resolve the problem and feed in into the workflows of M1 or M2.
The State Government has put the mechanisms in place, so this exchange works, but then
Councils are left to find the solution that best suites them and there business applications at
their own expense.
The state gov supplies the data to all other gov departments under some other agreement
I'm sure, in particular the Titles Office uses the property addresses supplied by councils, but
then cracks the sods so that councils have to have another MOUE to be able to use the
Titles Searching facility to improve the property matching etc. All councils should not have
been judged based on one Councils misuse of access.
The processing of M2s that are supplied by Councils need to have more money thrown at
them so that they are processed in a much more timely fashion - a greater commitment from
the budget process of the state gov to recognise that the spatial data of the state that
underpins a lot of the gov departments business, needs adequate funding so that people at
council level don’t get disheartened when they see time and time again that things haven’t
been done.
291