Council tensions flare over dual naming and gender quotas
Bass Coast Shire Council was forced to call a break in last week’s council meeting during a debate over dual names to accommodate First Nation language.
A STANDARD policy update descended into ideological warfare at the latest Bass Coast Shire Council meeting forcing an abrupt recess as councillors questioned the need to actively pursue Indigenous dual naming and state-mandated gender quotas.
What began as a routine vote to align local frameworks with the Victorian Naming Rules exposed political rifts within the chamber. The friction began when former Mayor and Liberal candidate for Bass, Councillor Halstead, challenged a specific clause in the document.
The clause stated that council had "no plans to proceed with dual naming at this stage," prompting Halstead to demand immediate clarification. The policy adopted on August 19 established the official framework for naming local roads, features, and landmarks.
It officially recognises the Bunurong Land Council Aboriginal Corporation as the sole Registered Aboriginal Party for the region. While it allows for the future introduction of Traditional Owner language dual names for eligible geographic features, it does not mandate them.
However, the most explosive debate cantered on the policy's alignment with the Victorian Government's Gender Equality Strategy 2023–2027. The state strategy sets an asymmetric target, requiring 70 per cent of all new commemorative place names to honour women.
The chamber was divided over the directive. Councillor Bauer defended the region's current naming landscape. He reminded the chamber that the pioneers who built the local community were predominantly white, Anglo-Saxon males.
Councillor Edwards launched a fierce assault on the state-mandated targets, labelling the policy inherently unequal. Edwards argued that true fairness requires an exact 50-50 split. She claimed that enforcing a 70 per cent female quota actively promoted inequality rather than resolving it.
This logic was rejected by Councillor Bell who argued that the 70 per cent target was a vital, corrective measure. She stated the quota was necessary to actively redress systemic historical wrongs that have erased women from local history.
Although the policy was passed council must now navigate a community divided over whether to preserve its colonial naming history or embrace progressive state targets.
Bell noted that because early infrastructure almost exclusively honoured founding fathers the new quota acted as an essential corrective measure for women who have been severely underrepresented on public maps.
Councillors asked for clarification that the dual naming process would actively combine First Nations language with traditional English names to better reflect shared history.
The tension peaked when Cr Halstead proposed her surprise amendment regarding the clause stating that council had no plans to proceed with dual naming at this stage.
Cr Halstead requested the removal of the clause fearing it pre-emptively closed off future options. While chamber procedures prevented her from immediately explaining her intent, Cr Halstead later clarified she did not oppose dual naming.
Instead Cr Halstead explained that she wanted to ensure that when a First Nations language name is chosen, its English interpretation appears alongside it on signage to assist with local wayfinding and community understanding.
Following a short interruption to the live online broadcast the Mayor reconvened the chamber and deferred to a council officer who explained that while the current report noted dual naming was not actively being pursued the policy did not legally prevent it.
Satisfied with the updated administrative advice Cr Halstead formally withdrew the amendment and apologised to the chamber for the sudden disruption, expressing relief that dual naming remained a future possibility.
Mayor Tessari then steadied the meeting by transitioning back to standard debate and offering the floor for closing replies before moving to a final vote on the policy.
During the council debate Cr Morgan strongly defended the initiative against claims of inequality. He dismissed concerns over a shortage of naming opportunities, arguing that councils frequently relied on repetitive coastal themes like "surf" or "beach."
Cr Morgan also noted that ongoing gender inequalities and misogyny continued to put women at higher risk. Furthermore he stated that the community should prioritise telling the stories of the Bunurong and Gunaikurnai traditional owners.
