Disgraced Mayor, Josh Gilligan Speech A Symptom of a Deeper Problem in Local Government
The recent suspension of Victorian Labor Mayor, Josh Gilligan has sparked debate about accountability in politics, but the speech he delivered in response may have revealed something even more troubling about the current culture within Local Government. Rather than focusing on the community he was elected to serve, Gilligan’s address largely centred on his own political journey, his personal struggles, and his sense of grievance.
For me, the speech became a case study in what I believe is increasingly wrong with modern politics across all levels in Australia. However, I struggle to find the reason beyond perhaps. Millennials continue to not stand up and think someone else will do the job for them.
Before we begin I want to acknowledge my involvement in politics and how I have been told many times that I should get out of politics. The truth is, I never wanted to be in it in the first place. My role has always been advocacy for the west, standing up for communities that too often feel ignored. So when I watched Gilligan’s speech, I wasn’t looking at it through the lens of political rivalry at one stage we were in the same political party. In fact, I had never met the man before and had never even heard his voice until that moment.
Yet the speech was really eye opening in who he is.
The controversial speech
You can watch a recording of the speech on Council Watch's Official Facebook and see From the outset, Gilligan focused heavily on himself. He spoke about being elected at the age of 23, about his time in government, and about the personal impact of the suspension process on him. What stood out the most to me, however, was what the speech did not contain.
There was no meaningful discussion of community outcomes
There was no reflection on the residents he was elected to represent
There were no examples of tangible achievements delivered for the people whose votes put him into office.
Instead, the speech became a long recounting of personal milestones and grievances and that alone should concern voters.
Public office is not meant to be about personal advancement. It is meant to be about service and delivering results for the community. When a politician faces disciplinary action, it would seem natural to highlight the work they have done for their constituents. If a representative has genuinely delivered outcomes for their electorate, those achievements should form the core of any defence.
But that was not what we heard.
Politics is shifting away from it's core values, and we're to blame
Josh Gilligan is not along in what as happened as there is an increasing narrative in politics revolving around personal hardship and victimhood. We are using Josh Gilligan as he is a recent public example and we can identify this by the way he criticised the very laws that were used to suspend him laws that, notably, he had no issue with when they were applied to others.
This contradiction highlights another uncomfortable truth about modern politics: the rules are often only questioned when they begin to affect the people who supported them.
For many in the western suburbs, this situation carries an additional layer of frustration. There have been repeated reports that Gilligan had previously mocked or criticised others facing disciplinary action, including Ashleigh Vandenberg, a First Nations woman who has been advocating strongly for the western suburbs and challenging entrenched power structures.
Yet when the system turned its attention toward him, the tone suddenly changed. The speech presented him as a victim of the very processes he had previously supported. This kind of inconsistency fuels public distrust in government. People expect fairness and accountability, but they also expect consistency. If politicians support rules when they apply to others, they must also accept those rules when they apply to themselves.
More broadly, Gilligan’s speech reflects a deeper cultural issue within politics one that I believes continues to discourage many capable people from ever running for office.
Increasingly, political speeches sound less like reports on community progress and more like personal branding exercises. Politicians speak about their careers, their journeys and their struggles, while the community outcomes that should define their work are treated as secondary.
The result is a system that appears increasingly inward looking and not community outcomes driven.
Those with strong skills, professional experience and the ability to deliver real outcomes often choose careers in the private sector or community leadership roles instead of entering politics. Meanwhile, the political sphere risks becoming populated by individuals whose main expertise is navigating internal political systems rather than solving real world problems. Such as who can branch stack the most or steal the most money to fund campaigns. Which we have seen occur in the western suburbs.
Once in office, some politicians then begin shaping those systems to entrench their own positions. Rules become barriers rather than pathways and the ladder that once allowed new voices to rise can slowly be pulled up behind them.
That perception whether entirely fair or not is incredibly damaging.
When voters begin to believe that politics is a closed club focused on personal advancement rather than community service, participation declines. Good candidates stay away, public trust erodes and the quality of governance suffers.
That is why the speech matters.
People Show Their True Selves In Moments of Crisis
Moments of crisis reveal a great deal about a person’s priorities. When faced with suspension, Gilligan had an opportunity to demonstrate the impact of his work. He could have spoken about the families he had helped, the projects he had delivered, or the improvements he had secured for his electorate and by being suspended they would be impacted the most.
Instead, the focus remained firmly on himself.
That is not just a personal error but is symbolic of a broader problem in politics today.
The community should always be the centre of public service. Every speech, every policy and every decision should ultimately come back to one question: how does this help the people we represent?
When politicians lose sight of that principle, they lose the trust that allows democracy to function effectively.
Gilligan’s suspension speech should not simply fade into the background of political news cycles. It should serve as a reminder of the standard voters deserve from their representatives.
Politics should not be about personal narratives or self-preservation, It MUST be about community results.
And until that focus returns, many people will continue to feel that the system has lost its way.
What are your thoughts?
image sources provided supplemented by Canva Pro subscription. This is a political opinion piece and not intended to defame or humiliate anyone. Those in public office chose to be there and a high standard of public and political debate needs to be accepted