 |
| CLICK HERE TO GO TO THE EXAMINER STORY
When it comes to rounding a year out if you have, as they say, 'skin in the game', it is best that you acknowledge the political filters that are on the lens in THE EXAMINER.
|
As well, with this contribution in THE EXAMINER one has had to navigate it's passage through a tortuous labyrinthine pathway through smoke and mirrors as well.
The 'performance review' is so, so dependent, and so obviously, on the GM/CEO's briefings that inform the THE EXAMINER on every occasion. These briefings are generously funded by ratepayers who grant him his generous budget allocation to allow him to pay whoever to make him look 'shipshape and shiny'.
The other thing that needs to be said is that the Mayor and Councillors are 'voiceless' and one can only assume that this is because they wouldn't want to be seen to be saying anything while trying to keep a straight face.
Yes, the Mayor is in 'the pictures' but he is, and his fellow Councillors too, are voiceless and inaudible in this 'performance review' – slanted as it is. This must tell us something about the status of their abdication as 'representatives'.
It is also noteworthy that 'THE EXAMINER' will typically avoid anything resembling an 'incisive critical review' relevant to the City of Launceston. Why might this be?
On the other hand, 'THE MERCURY' is much more likely to take the discourse right to a council's, or an officer's, doorstep –LINK.
For instance, recently they reported that Kingbrough's GM is paid more than 'The Premier' and its also true for Launceston's GM/CEO – but do not expect to glean that kind of information in THE EXAMINER anytime soon.
Generally the review in dot point can be characterised in a few words:
Yes, the Mayor is in 'the pictures' but he is, and his fellow Councillors too, are voiceless and inaudible in this 'performance review' – slanted as it is. This must tell us something about the status of their abdication as 'representatives'.
It is also noteworthy that 'THE EXAMINER' will typically avoid anything resembling an 'incisive critical review' relevant to the City of Launceston. Why might this be?
On the other hand, 'THE MERCURY' is much more likely to take the discourse right to a council's, or an officer's, doorstep –LINK.
For instance, recently they reported that Kingbrough's GM is paid more than 'The Premier' and its also true for Launceston's GM/CEO – but do not expect to glean that kind of information in THE EXAMINER anytime soon.
Generally the review in dot point can be characterised in a few words:
- Restructure ....Well this is an example of bureaucratic overreach.
- Invermay Traffic master plan ... This is just bureaucratic ineptitude.
- Riverbend Park opening ... This is an exemplar of uncontrolled budgetary over runs ... BIG TIME and reportedly in the multiple $Millions.
- Shopping in the City report ... This is diversionary smoke and mirrors at work.
- Building heights report ... This is inept planning that got everyone at Town Hall in trouble.
- Tomorrow Together ... This is just a cynical and disingenuous Machiavellian manoeuvre
- Free parking ... This is just another example of cynical posturing all round
- Climate emergency ... This is just virtue signalling nothing nothing more, no\thing less
- Macquarie House opening ... This turns out to be a cynical political manoeuvre
- QVMAG audit ... Yet another cynical and disingenuous manoeuvre to detract attention albeit that there is/was some need but not as is being executed
- Federal election ... More ill considered parish pump politics
- Australia Day ... This is cynical virtue signalling
- Gorge Hotel ... This is an exemplar of very poor planning and administration.
- Consultancy data ... This is a cynical promise that there is no intention to fulfil
- Tourism and events ... This is more disingenuous clap trap
- IN 2020 ... More smoke and mirrors
Against this there is a litany of administrative failures along with every opportunity being taken to avoid meaningful accountability. See SECTION 62 of the Local Govt Act 1993.
Moreover, when a Councillor asks for information in an open Council meeting undertakings are given but not delivered upon – the question isn't even recorded. In various ways this kind of thing has become 'signature behaviour' at Town Hall.
HOWEVER read the 'year in review', dredge your memories and apply the credibility test. Around the Launceston Concerned Citizens' network BULLshit alarms are ringing loudly.
No comments:
Post a Comment