Readers who have a preference for tortuous editorials that have all the hallmarks of a dog's breakfast, this week's piece cobbled together by Coastal View's Graham Orams is a fairdinkum ripper. Orams started with a bit about the Do Not Call register (yes, Mr Orams, most readers would endorse your remarks) and finally concluded, after dragging his wife into another of his tales yet again, with remarks about voting for candidates in the local council election on the basis of their gender.
Truly, it read like a six, or perhaps more, schooners' effort.
On the page before his "Comment", Orams had a "news" item about the council elections. It rehashed information that has been in the public arena for at least two weeks and had nothing new to add to the topic. The piece was a classic piece of lazy journalism.
Whatever this bloke gets paid for his rubbish, it's too much.
Friday 7 September 2012
Clarence Valley Council Election 2012 Candidate Scorecard: Week Five
Candidates standing for the nine councillor positions at the 8 September 2012 Clarence Valley Local Government Election are being rated on their individual campaigns to win over voters.
The score range is -10 to 10. Every candidate starts at zero (0)
Scoring began in the week ending 10 August 2012.
In this final week of the election campaign it’s all about how competent the candidates appear.
The week commenced with the Yamba District Chamber of Commerce meet the candidates forum, the last one before polling day.
Name Designation Running Score
Rod Morrison Independent 1 This candidate’s score remains static as he returns this week to the only matter he really understands – flooding at Brushgrove. While his good intentions are not doubted, his abilities are.
Margot Scott Independent 2.5 Margot’s score also remains the same as again she added little to the election debate this week which would convince that she has the knowledge and experience to be an effective shire councillor.
Paul Parkinson -10 If there was a way to mark this candidate down further than the maximum minus he now sits on one would be tempted to take it. His performance at the Yamba Meet the Candidates forum was a low point in the election campaign – more here. And yes, he is still claiming three terms as a Kempsey Shire councillor equals 14 years and not the 12 attributed to him by that very same council.
Craig Howe Independent 1 + 1 = 2 Craig’s score goes up a point on the basis of his commitment to local youth and the fact that he at least has experience in local government.
Andrew Baker Independent -10 This candidate cannot possibly score any lower as he continues to run what is essentially a pro-unfettered development agenda. His attempts to downplay his own poor business management skills as he promises to reform Clarence Valley Council management (in a way which obviously benefits his business interests) inspires little confidence. As does the fact that last Monday night he was telling voters that Council did not consider economic implications when making decisions, but by Thursday was saying that councillors were provided with "economic assessments" before making decisions.
Ursula Tunks Independent 3.5 + 0.2 = 3.7 This candidate again inches forward on the back of the fact that she at least understood the role of the general manager (0.2), but remains a worrisome wild card.
Joy de Roos 2 Joy marks time at the end of this final week as she added nothing to what she had said before.
Jim Simmons Independent 2 + 1 + 1 =4 Jim doubled his score because he admitted to the reality of Council budget constraints (1) and confessed that it had dropped the ball when it tore down the Yamba skate park and rebuilt it to a new design without any community consultation (1).
Greg Clancy Independent 8.5 + 1 = 9.5 This candidate increased his score again this week for pointing out the real benefits of not expanding the Port of Yamba. It was noticeable that the marine business owner at the Yamba forum openly agreed with him.
Jane Beeby Independent -4 + -4 + -2= -10 Jane is of the opinion that it is not her job to tell voters what she can do for [insert name of town] and happily told Yamba residents exactly that last Monday night (-4). Her continual behind the scenes complaints about legitimate community debate in local newspapers earns her further demerits points (-2).
Sue Hughes Independent 7.5 + 1 = 8.5 Her score increases as she was brave enough to insist that money raised by the sale of council’s community assets should be spent in the area which had lost the use and enjoyment of a particular asset (1).
Karen Toms 8.5 + -1 = 7.5 Karen lost a point due to her open support for the idea that a reduction in the wages and working conditions of small business employees would benefit the community (-1). Although local government has no direct influence on such matters, councillors' opinions often affect the tone in small business employer-employee relations and such remarks are not helpful.
Michael McIvor Independent 1 This candidate gains no new points as he fails to impress on any front. One cannot help wondering if his support of any ‘buy local’ policy is predicated on a vague hope that his own business would benefit in some way.
Jeremy Challacombe Independent -5 + -1 + -3 = -9 Jeremy manages a minus bonanza this week by failing to realise that the Island Trader no longer operates out of the Lower Clarence River (-1) and for his rather strange belief that Yaegl representatives might need to sit cross legged in the sand before they could discuss Dirrungun at the mouth of the Clarence River (-3).
Richie Williamson 3.5 + 0.5 = 4 Richie’s score crept up a notch due to the fact that he appeared to recognise that different areas within the Valley have different strengths and needs. The fact that as the most recent mayor his score is remains so low is due to his spotty past voting record.
Margaret McKenna Independent -10 Margaret did nothing to redeem herself this week as her passive-aggressive attitude to the Lower Clarence remained a feature of her utterances on the campaign trail. However, she did provide a moment of wry amusement as she strongly pressed her locally born and bred background to a room full of voters who had predominantly retired into the area from elsewhere in New South Wales.
Jason Kingsley Independent 1 This candidate remains something of an enigma and failed to make any real impression over the course of the election campaign.
Conclusion:
This local government election campaign has been one which has seen the business community set the debate agenda and therefore its needs have been a dominant preoccupation of the political discourse.
It was also a campaign which highlighted how ill-prepared many of the new candidates are for the office they seek, how bereft of original ideas the majority are, how little some of them know about the Clarence Valley and how proudly they wear this ignorance.
Disappointingly the uncritical approach by local media continues when reporting on local government elections. So even though this year the campaign coverage has been the most extensive in recent memory, it did little more than supply all candidates with a form of free advertising.
Planning should be based on need and not greed, says Nimbin candidate in 2012 Lismore LGA Election
Letter to the Editor in Echonet Daily on 4 September 2012:
Planning for need, not greed
As we move toward the local government elections next weekend you will be asked to consider the claims of a range of contenders for local government office, but the system our newly elected councillors will administer on our behalf seems to barely rate a mention.
‘Individuals and markets are best placed to deliver diverse choices in all development outcomes including housing and local centres,’ is the claim made by the NSW coalition government in their recent discussion paper ‘A new planning system for NSW’ (p 69).
It’s a curious claim given that individuals and markets have a well-known tendency to look after themselves thank you very much and not the local community. Surely it is our democratic local government that should mediate planning matters in our local community toward the common or community interest away from self-interest?
If the Liberal/National Party coalition do bring in legislation in line with their discussion paper, the role of elected councillors in determining development applications is recommended to be removed. The real decisions will be left to a collection of private certifiers for so-called exempt and complying development, and decision-making panels appointed by the state government of the day for larger developments. You will have no say in what is built or mined, near you or next to you.
The Greens see this as a terribly unbalanced and developer-friendly set of planning laws that remove all community involvement in almost every development decision across NSW. Powers to local councils to certify development need to be strengthened, not removed, giving the community an equal say to developers in the assessment process.
The government’s plan also removes Ecologically Sustainable Development (ESD) as one of the key objectives of the NSW planning system.
In his address to city mayors at Rio+20, the UN secretary general, Ban Ki-Moon, declared that by ‘building sustainable towns and cities, you will build global sustainability’.
Ecosystems are the planet’s life support. Human health and survival are dependent on them. Cities must be planned, designed to protect both the health of the ecosystems and the health of people, not the interests of developers.
The kind of suburbs and rural areas we live in are about to be transformed, and we won’t have a say in it. The best we can hope for is a local council who will fight the state government tooth and nail to defend what little say we have over planning what happens in our neighbourhood.
Wouldn’t it be good if we had a real say and planning was based on community needs rather than greed? The Greens are committed to doing this.
Susan Stock
Lismore Greens candidate, Nimbin
Lismore Greens candidate, Nimbin
NSW Legislative Council Inquiry raises the issue of a Clarence River dam
From A Clarence Valley Protest on 6 September 2012:
The Play:
The future of water storage in New South Wales.
The Sub-Plot:
That National Party fixation with the Clarence River.
The Scene:
Enter from stage right NSW Nationals MLC PETER R. PHELPS. Followed by DAVID ANDREW HARRISS, Commissioner, NSW Office of Water, Department of Primary Industries and, STEWART RICHARD WEBSTER, Principal Director, Investment Appraisal, Statistical Analysis and Economic Research, NSW Trade and Investment.
The Hon. Dr PETER PHELPS: Are there any rivers in northern New South Wales which sow significant outflows of fresh water to the sea which could be used for damming purposes?
Mr HARRISS: The only one that has been investigated over many years was the Clarence River and that has been shown that it would be both uneconomic and have significant environmental impacts as a consequence. One of the things that have been demonstrated for years is coastal diversions. It is all right in the Snarly because you have quite a substantial catchment area and you have a number of sites for dams—Jindabyne, Eucumbene, Talbingo, Bowen. In the coastal ranges further north around the Clarence to get that catchment area to fill the dam you have to have the dam located further down to get enough water so it cannot be at the top. Further down you locate that dam, the higher the pumping cost to get the water back over the top or the tunnelling cost to get it through the dam. For that reason it has shown that it would not be economically beneficial to construct a dam to divert water from the coastal side into the western side because there would be no activity currently which would generate revenue on the megalitre of water……..
The Hon. Dr PETER PHELPS: Presumably, given what Mr Harriss said earlier about us having dammed every river in New South Wales that it is economically viable to dam, those proposals would be only catchment augmentation.
Mr WEBSTER: What was economically viable 30 years ago might not be now because the value of water changes as an input into various primary production processes. While it appears that the large storage sites have been taken, there may be opportunities.
The Hon. Dr PETER PHELPS: Just not on the Clarence River.
Mr HARRISS: There are opportunities on the Clarence River. What was proposed during the drought—and Malcolm Turnbull promoted it—was to build that dam but then to pipe the water up to south-west Queensland, not to move it into western New South Wales, which was the original proposal. That might have been a bit more economically viable if we were recovering the cost through urban population charges as opposed to the rate charged per kilolitre. However, Queensland was not remotely interested in that. There are some sites, and we mentioned Birrell Creek dam, which is not a big site. There is also the Welcome Reef site near Braidwood. That proposal has been around for about 40 or 50 years. There are some sites. However, the point was made that where it was easy to build a dam 50 or 60—
The Hon. Dr PETER PHELPS: So the low hanging fruit is gone.
Mr HARRISS: Yes.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
