Community engagement: a matter long supported by EastEnders

At our February meeting we welcomed Dinuki Scharenguivel, the council’s manager of community engagement and impact when we debated several aspects of the proposed City of Melbourne 2026-2030 Community Engagement Policy.

This built upon a lengthy meeting we had with the team late in 2025 on our expectations of the new policy and feedback on the current policy.

We then had the benefit at our March meeting of hearing from our Federal Member for the seat of Melbourne Sarah Witty who was keen to hear from us about matters that we thought were important and needed her attention.

Our April meeting was an opportunity to undertake our own version of community engagement and using a focus group approach, we elicited the views of all our members and friends in attendance on contemporary matters of interest in the City of Melbourne and particularly the CBD.

In small groups, attendees considered six key issues, advised their positive and negative thoughts, and then completed a survey to respond to questions under each of the nominated issues. Some fascinating data have been revealed.

The issues identified were:

• The City of Melbourne Budget 2026/2027;
• The proposed external review of the Queen Victoria Market (QVM);
• Planning in the City of Melbourne and engagement with affected stakeholders;
• The Melbourne International Flower and Garden Show;
• Safety and security on our streets; and
• Health services in the CBD.

We have undertaken detailed analyses of the data collected but to report on each would be far too long an article for this column in CBD News.

However, one area that is worthy of reporting is the curiosity about the proposed external review of QVM. The major takeaway is that every person expressed their love for QVM with many regular patrons and a unanimous view that we want it to continue to be one of the great markets of the world with exceptional heritage value.

The participants were aware that QVM is owned by the City of Melbourne and its wholly owned subsidiary, Queen Victoria Market Pty Ltd, which is governed by an independent board of six directors. The board is responsible for managing the day-to-day operations of the market. As owners of the Queen Victoria Market, the City of Melbourne has oversight and responsibility for any capital improvements at the site.

EastEnders has a strong interest in QVM and is aware of criticisms by the Friends of QVM, residents and traders about the current state of QVM. Due to our interactions with all or some of these groups, we totally empathise with their issues.

It was in this context that the City of Melbourne council on March 31, 2026 approved of an external independent review of the management and governance arrangements of QVM.

EastEnders is an eclectic group and includes several people with strong managerial and professional backgrounds. The group discussion raised questions as to why the independent board was not being made accountable by its shareholder, the City of Melbourne, for the issues that were being experienced. Issues of communication, engagement, finance and transparency in many people’s view ought not be the rationale for an external review of the scope envisaged. Indeed, with appropriate leadership from both the board and the City of Melbourne, many viewed the issues as being far from intractable with good will and a collaborative approach.

The other aspect of concern discussed and implied in the data was the commitment by the council to approve the external review in the absence of detailed terms of reference and a financial estimate. Certainly, the length of time suggested, which includes two substantial reports, suggests that the cost will be a considerable unbudgeted burden on City of Melbourne resources. This stretched the understanding of sound fiscal governance.

Four questions were asked of the group with the following outcomes:

1. Do you agree that QVM is an iconic part of the City of Melbourne? Yes: 100 per cent; No: zero per cent

2. Do you think the owner of the QVM, the City of Melbourne, should seek advice from its Board of Directors on the items of concern identified prior to moving to an independent external review? Yes: 94 per cent; No: six per cent

3. Do you think it is the right time to have an independent external review of QVM? Yes: 25 per cent; No: 75 per cent

4. Do you agree that the council should approve an external review in the absence of any budget or financial estimate? Yes: 16 per cent; No: 84 per cent

In summary, while every participant expressed great love for QVM, there was a perceived lack of commitment to the existing Board of Directors by its shareholder and questions of fairness and due process were brought into play.

Of course, the caveat for presenting these data is that it is based on a range of engaged people who participated in this focus group. The information that informed the discussion was from the public record and there is no way of knowing the dynamics between all parties and the respective interactions. It is certainly not presented as a scientifically based study.

That said, it is one source of information derived from using one type of community engagement. We have similarly interesting findings from the other five issues discussed.

We are proud that we have been able to share it with you.

Our next meetings, which are usually on the third Tuesday of each month, will be with the executive director of the Royal Historical Society of Victoria, Steven Cooke; Dana Foenander who will discuss the City of Melbourne’s Heritage Strategy 2026; and our Lord Mayor and Deputy Lord Mayor. An interesting few months ahead.

All are welcome to join us as members or visitors. More information at [email protected] •