REFER TO TWO NEWCASTLE HERALD ARTICLES:
POWER IN MERGED COUNCILS (31/8)
FIX RAIL GATE OR CLOSE IT (1/9).
There’s no beating Cr Aaron Buman for populist (in the very worst sense of the word) and simplistic, poorly thought through media announcements. Or perhaps we should blame those he calls his “advisors”.
Yesterday (H, 31/8)it was for Newcastle, Lake Macquarie, Maitland, Port Stephens and Cessnock to from a “Hunter super council”.
Is this genuine local government? He compares it with Brisbane City Council. Has he compared Brisbane’s population base with his Hunter Council’s?
Or the differences between New South Wales’ and Queensland’s local government powers ? Would our public transport be a poisoned chalice?
Today (H, 1/9) it’s to fix the Adamstown rail crossing or close it.
In this case, he has filched one of Cr Tate’s favourite publicity media grabs, though his demands never made any difference. Nor I predict will Buman’s.
Is this an opening salvo for a 2011 state election campaign? Has he seriously thought through the traffic flow implications?
And didn’t Cr Buman consistently say over the last Council term that rail issues were none of Council’s business?
Monday, August 31, 2009
LAZY COUNCILLORS WANT IT BOTH WAYS
GEE GIVE US A BREAK; COUNCIL CONSIDERS JULY HOLIDAY (HERALD, 1/09/09)
THE FOLLOWING IS A LETTER TO THE NRECASTLE HERALD IN RESPONSE THE ABOVE ARTICLE
After a week or so in office last year, Newcastle City Council, arrogantly, and in ignorance, decided to halve their meeting load. This is despite having a new general manager to advise them with relatively little local government background and with 10 out of the 13 councillors having little or no background or experience.
Now they want a mid-year break. Has it occurred to them that the main reason they a paid a higher fee than most other councils in NSW is their greater workload? Only Sydney City Councillors are paid more. They appear to want it both ways.
THE FOLLOWING IS A LETTER TO THE NRECASTLE HERALD IN RESPONSE THE ABOVE ARTICLE
After a week or so in office last year, Newcastle City Council, arrogantly, and in ignorance, decided to halve their meeting load. This is despite having a new general manager to advise them with relatively little local government background and with 10 out of the 13 councillors having little or no background or experience.
Now they want a mid-year break. Has it occurred to them that the main reason they a paid a higher fee than most other councils in NSW is their greater workload? Only Sydney City Councillors are paid more. They appear to want it both ways.
Monday, August 10, 2009
CR BOYD INCORRECT IN HIS ASSURANCES ABOUT A FINAL DECISION ON THE RAIL LINE TO NEWCASTLE
Cr Boyd’s letter (H, 27/7) correctly claimed that on Dec 2, 2008, Council unanimously resolved not to agree to any change in the existing transport modes until the State government implemented an integrated public transport system in Newcastle.
Unfortunately that decision was overridden by Council’s decision on June 16 (supported by Cr Boyd) to endorse the HDC Report’s “City Revitalisation” recommendations, including cutting of the rail line to Newcastle and a strategy for an integrated transport system, which must be based on the line being cut. The line may stay until the strategy is implemented. Council nevertheless supports its removal.
This decision, supported by the conservative bloc (including Cr Boyd) was made without any planning report or public submissions. The majority of councillors, including Cr Boyd, endorsed the June decision last Tuesday by voting against a motion to rescind that resolution.
Unfortunately that decision was overridden by Council’s decision on June 16 (supported by Cr Boyd) to endorse the HDC Report’s “City Revitalisation” recommendations, including cutting of the rail line to Newcastle and a strategy for an integrated transport system, which must be based on the line being cut. The line may stay until the strategy is implemented. Council nevertheless supports its removal.
This decision, supported by the conservative bloc (including Cr Boyd) was made without any planning report or public submissions. The majority of councillors, including Cr Boyd, endorsed the June decision last Tuesday by voting against a motion to rescind that resolution.
WHO SHOULD BE NEWCASTLE COUNCIL'S SPOKESPERSON ON POLICY? CERTAINLY NOT THE GENERAL MANAGER
It was great that ABC National Radio broadcast their program AM from Stockton today. Why, however, was Newcastle Council GM Lindy Hyam , rather than Lord Mayor John Tate interviewed as spokesperson on Council policies? Why didn’t Ms Hyam suggest him as the appropriate interviewee and what will Cr Tate and councillors do to rectify this? Her ideas about Newcastle initiatives for a more sustainable city appeared to be eminently supportable. However, the ABC announcer’s claim that Newcastle City Council supports an increase in coal production and export was incorrect. It’s a pity she didn’t correct this. One would expect that Cr Tate would have corrected this error.
THE ABOVE LETTER TO THE EDITOR (NEWCASTLE HERALD) WAS SENT TODAY.IT HIGHLIGHTS THE OLD PROBLEM OF GENERAL MANAGERS SEEKING TO ACT AS SPOKESPERSON ON POLICY MATTERS AND TOO OFTEN THEY GET AWAY WITH IT, EVEN THOUGH THEY ARE QUICK TO REACT (OFTEN PUBLICLY) IF MAYORS OR COUNCILLORS MAKE PUBLIC COMMENTS ABOUT THEIR DOMAIN-OPERATIONAL MANAGEMENT.THIS INSTANCE MAY BE EXCUSED AS GM INEXPERIENCE-TIME WILL TELL.
IT ALSO RAISES THE QUESTION OF WHAT LORD MAYOR TATE WOULD HAVE SAID IN DEFENCE OF NEWCASTLE COUNCIL POLICY OPPOSING MORE COAL MINING, GIVEN HIS PERSONAL SUPPORT FOR IT.
AFTER 28 YEARS AS A COUNCILLOR AND 5 GENERAL MANAGERS HE SHOULD BE AWARE AND SWIFT TO RESPOND TO INAPPROPRIATE ACTIONS FROM COUNCIL MANAGEMENT.
BASED ON THE EXPERIENCE OF HIS ACTIONS OVER THE PAST 2 MAYORAL TERMS ,NOTHING WILL HAPPEN IN MY VIEW.
MAYORS AND COUNCILS THAT ALLOW GENERAL MANAGERS TO RUN THE SHOW, EITHER BECAUSE OF LACK OF KNOWLEDGE (10 NEW COUNCILLORS) OR MAYORAL LAZINESS (THE BUCK ALWAYS STOPS WITH THE MAYOR AS LEADER) ARE DIGGING THEIR OWN GRAVE.
REMEMBER THE MAJOR HERALD ARTICLE DURING THE LAST TERM(C 2005),WHICH FEATURED THE MOST POWERFUL PEOPLE LEADERS WHO RAN THE CITY? GENERAL MANAGER JANET DORE WAS ONE BUT LORD MAYOR TATE WAS MISSING.TATE'S RESPONSE TO CALLS FROM (THEN)GREENS CR MCKENZIE TO ASSERT HIMSELF AND COMPLAIN WAS TO DO NOTHING.THAT'S WAS INDICATIVE OF COUNCIL LEADERSHIP SINCE 1999.
Published as a Short take; Newcastle Herald, 11/08/09.
THE ABOVE LETTER TO THE EDITOR (NEWCASTLE HERALD) WAS SENT TODAY.IT HIGHLIGHTS THE OLD PROBLEM OF GENERAL MANAGERS SEEKING TO ACT AS SPOKESPERSON ON POLICY MATTERS AND TOO OFTEN THEY GET AWAY WITH IT, EVEN THOUGH THEY ARE QUICK TO REACT (OFTEN PUBLICLY) IF MAYORS OR COUNCILLORS MAKE PUBLIC COMMENTS ABOUT THEIR DOMAIN-OPERATIONAL MANAGEMENT.THIS INSTANCE MAY BE EXCUSED AS GM INEXPERIENCE-TIME WILL TELL.
IT ALSO RAISES THE QUESTION OF WHAT LORD MAYOR TATE WOULD HAVE SAID IN DEFENCE OF NEWCASTLE COUNCIL POLICY OPPOSING MORE COAL MINING, GIVEN HIS PERSONAL SUPPORT FOR IT.
AFTER 28 YEARS AS A COUNCILLOR AND 5 GENERAL MANAGERS HE SHOULD BE AWARE AND SWIFT TO RESPOND TO INAPPROPRIATE ACTIONS FROM COUNCIL MANAGEMENT.
BASED ON THE EXPERIENCE OF HIS ACTIONS OVER THE PAST 2 MAYORAL TERMS ,NOTHING WILL HAPPEN IN MY VIEW.
MAYORS AND COUNCILS THAT ALLOW GENERAL MANAGERS TO RUN THE SHOW, EITHER BECAUSE OF LACK OF KNOWLEDGE (10 NEW COUNCILLORS) OR MAYORAL LAZINESS (THE BUCK ALWAYS STOPS WITH THE MAYOR AS LEADER) ARE DIGGING THEIR OWN GRAVE.
REMEMBER THE MAJOR HERALD ARTICLE DURING THE LAST TERM(C 2005),WHICH FEATURED THE MOST POWERFUL PEOPLE LEADERS WHO RAN THE CITY? GENERAL MANAGER JANET DORE WAS ONE BUT LORD MAYOR TATE WAS MISSING.TATE'S RESPONSE TO CALLS FROM (THEN)GREENS CR MCKENZIE TO ASSERT HIMSELF AND COMPLAIN WAS TO DO NOTHING.THAT'S WAS INDICATIVE OF COUNCIL LEADERSHIP SINCE 1999.
Published as a Short take; Newcastle Herald, 11/08/09.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)