AFTER MONDAY IT WILL BE WEDNESDAY

ROLL UP ROLL UP AND PAYZ YOUR MONEY

LAUNCESTON COUNCIL'S PERFORMANCE

CLICK ON AN IMAGE TO ENLARGE

On FACEBOOK Basil Fitch invites people who read his journal to give this council and the aldermen a score. Basil has led the way now it is over to the city's ratepayers and residents to supply their scores. As they say watch this space for an outcome.

ALD. JANIE'S FUNDRAISER: NO EXTRA WORDS NEEDED

A night showcasing the Launceston community, its potential and its abundance of talent is how Janie Finlay will launch her campaign for mayor and alderman. .......... Held at the Albert Hall on August 8, the black-tie gala dinner costs $150 per ticket and will feature talented young performers from Bee Bop Dance Studio and an award-winning auctioneer. .......... “I love the movie The Greatest Showman so I am loosely theming the night around that,” Alderman Finlay said. .......... Tickets to The Greatest Showman: A Celebration of Launceston include a three-course meal and a welcome drink on arrival. .......... “It is a fundraiser for my campaign but it’s more than that ... it is about celebrating all that we are now and the talents that we have here, but it’s also showcasing what is possible for Launceston,” Alderman Finlay said. .......... The event is a representation of “who I am”. .......... “The reason why I am showcasing The Greatest Showman is one of my favourite songs is This is Me and this [the fundraiser] is showcasing who I am and this is me.” .......... At this stage, Alderman Finlay is unsure how much money from each ticket will go towards her campaign. .......... “It will depend on the number of people I get in the hall,” she said. .......... The hall can hold 45 tables with 10 people per tables. Alderman Finlay already had commitments for about 13 tables so far. Tickets are available from Eventbrite. .......... “This is probably the most transparent way of raising funds, by putting on an event and allowing people to make that decision to buy a ticket,” she said. .......... “I believe I am perfectly suited for this role, in this time, in this city and I need a little help.” .......... First elected in 2000, Alderman Finlay served as Launceston mayor from 2002 to 2005. .......... She was the youngest female mayor in Australian history, elected at age 27. .......... In 2007 Alderman Finlay resigned from council to pursue other interests. .......... During Alderman Finlay’s seven-year break from council she worked in a range of diverse positions including NAI Harcourts director, Launceston Tonadoes chairwoman and the Tasmanian Symphony Orchestra director. .......... “I spent that time developing a lot more skills, but I wanted to give back to the community,” she said. .......... “I remember from day one, when I got back [to council] I was like ‘wow this is home’, it feels like the perfect role for me.” .......... Alderman Finlay was re-elected to the council in 2014. .......... Launceston’s local government election is scheduled for October 30. ...  Sarah Aquilina

EXPRESSIONS OF INTEREST MEETING JULYV 24 @ 2.00PM

..............

CLICK ON AN IMAGE TO ENLARGE

You are invited to a meeting of people interested in establishing a publication cooperative and working towards building up a network of contributors and service providers capable producing telling and celebrating  'Tamar/Esk Stories' wherever their readers may be. 

The meeting has been planned for Tuesday July 24 at 2.00 pm at the SILO HOTEL 89-91 Lindsay St, Invermay TASMANIA

FOR MORE INFORMATION

• The ONline draft publication ... CLICK HERE
• Expressions of Interest ... CLICK HERE
• Draft Plan ... CLICK HERE
• Draft Policies ... CLICK HERE (work-in-progress)

MORE INFORMATION

REFORM IS DIFFICULT, MORE DIFFICULT THAN IT NEEDS TO BE

Councillor Peter Keareney seems to be operating from a position that goes something like, 'I cannot see any breakages, so it's not broken, let's just keep on keeping on like we always have .... a bit like British Paints – well that sort of thing.  

And, the compliant press can always be trusted to run this sort of argument since nobody is advocating upturning the apple cart.

Councillor Kearney, and the 'status-quoists' he speaks for and with, apparently entertain the notion that an Act devised in 1993 to regulate civic behaviours worked when it was invoked, has worked well enough since and is working well enough now, and by extension will work way into the future. So, it definitely doesn't need to be changed. Well, it turns out that this proposition is quite informative. The serial and surreal applications of Sections 62 & 65 in that Act needs to be called out for starters.

This 'status quo' proposition demands that we all look away while the 'political class' get on with things. If that demands discretionary accountability and flexible transparency, so be it – it seems. After all that's why Section 62  Clause 2 of Tasmania's Local Govt. Act is there. Isn't it?

The idea that Tasmania cannot afford 29 councils has a great deal of merit, and especially so given that the councils range in size between less than 1,000 residents to over 65,000 residents. Without skirting around the issue, Tasmania, with about half a million people actually lacks sufficient talent to run 29 councils. Then there is the issue of expertise, the breadth of experience and even the qualifications required to devise 21st Century strategies and policiesand then be equipped to implement them via 29 councils. 

Among the many comparisons drawn, Tasmania has been equated with two largish Sydney or Melbourne suburbs. Okay, that is not entirely fair but it does set the scene quite well if you have'lived away' and somewhere where the cut and thrust of governance is played out in somewhat more accountable ways. Right now, Tasmania could profitably take a close look at Queensland for guidance in local government reform. A Brisbane ratepayer is likely to tell you that they have "the most transparent local governance in the world" and delinquent mayors have been sacked, a council too, and so on.

A cursory survey of the aldermen and councillors in 'Tassie' will demonstrate a different story in regard to 'accountability' – and quite quickly. After the 'political class' comes 'the salaried officers' and any developer will tell you just how uneven their skill sets are across Tasmania even if by-and-large they are much better equipped than their political masters – and its assumed that they are under Section 65 of the Act. It is little wonder that the odd 'GM' has been sprung calling out 'the politicians' while raking in the largess ratepayers are conscripted to pay them. What a lazy business model.  All this is resplendent as it is with an in-built success factor.

Then Councillor Kearney in The Examiner, speaking it seems on behalf of all the 'status-quoists', and some elected representatives, proffers the idea that a council is like a business. I'm sorry, that's nonsense, utter nonsense. A council's purpose for the information of the deluded is: 

• to provide for the health, safety and welfare of the community; 

 • to represent and promote the interests of the community; 

• to provide for the peace, order and good government of a municipal area.

A council is not there to carry out a specific activity with an objective of making a profit. Councils exist to deliver services – ideally at the least cost to their constituents.

Comparing a council with a business is a bit like saying a banana is much the same as an apple. Yes, they're both fruit but after that their differences are much more significant than the similarities.

Ideally, the 1993 Tasmanian Local Govt. model, the one the 'status-quoists' favour, the one that's broken, is the very one that needs to be replaced with a representational structure that is fit-for-purpose in a 21st Century context – like right now for instance. 

The 'status-quoists' can cherry-pick less than a handful of councils –interestingly one being one that Councillor Kearney serves on – as exemplars of appropriate representational governance. They do so, apparently, to defend the status quo. If they, indeed if we, had been looking we might have discovered that 'the quo' has lost its status long ago along with any gloss it might have had – and even that was more a mirage than a fact.

If the victims, and yes"victim"is used advisedly, of others in the State hold other views 'status-quoists' should not be too surprised. It is very clear that there are way, way too many councillors and aldermen occupying far too many seats for too little purpose other than perhaps to collect their allowances. 

If you listen hard you'll be able to hear them all bleat like so many poddy-calves as their access to'the teat' is threatened. It's a real worry if privileges might yet be withdrawn to make way for transparent accountability – and a fresher model. Yes, yes, I'm dreaming but there you go.

Far from everything being okay, really, Local Govt. in Tasmania is way passed its use-by-date as would be a month-old bottle of milk. Like so many of the defenders of the faith, the 'status-quoists', are now throwing smoke bombs and flashing their mirrors all over the place. Nonetheless, the 'status-quoists' out there would serve their communities much better if they simply got out of the road. 

Local Govt. in Tasmania is kaput, buggered, threadbare, stuffed, defunct, worn-out, in tatters,shabby, whatever. It's also running out of time and very low on credibility. 'Status-quoists' divining 'the right way ahead' is  dumb and oxymoronic. It is a bit like telling someone to hold their horses while we take our time. Some are no longer ready for that.

Just saying, that sort of thing looks a tad hollow. It is more so, given that a lot of dead heads seem to be hanging on in the bleakness even if it does mean less flowers, fewer green shoots and not enough fruit ahead.

Sorry about the cliches but as it turns out this is a case of cliches at 25 paces and they started it. It goes with the territory. Someone, somewhere said that "the status quo lends itself to destruction".

Ray Norman\

WHO SAYS LOCAL GOVERNMENT IN TASMANIA AIN'T BROKEN??

PUBLISHED  JULY 4 2018 - 6:00AM ... CLICK HERE

I am a councillor on the West Tamar Council. You know, the council who failed to merge with George Town, 'proving' that the government must take over. Well not so fast there. Local government reform is currently a term that refers almost exclusively to boundary changes. It is forgotten that the more successful reforms, those in 1993, went well beyond boundaries to the operation of councils. Those advocating boundary changes as reform would do well to learn from the experience of 1993, not continually try to repeat the failed 1997-98 top-down directions approach. “Twenty-nine councils is too many" is a slogan without substance. If it is meant seriously then ask the government to bring in population criteria for local government areas. Say 12,500 minimum for a municipal area. That would impact on 14 councils. However, government is unlikely to do it. Communities have repeatedly demonstrated strong opposition to that top down approach. Amalgamating cities is no better. Possible reduction in council numbers: two. For residents and ratepayers, the main game is to have a high-performing council, that is efficient, well governed and adding quality to their lives.Many councils are like that. For example the Break O'Day Council is thriving with a talented mayor, good general manager and effective councillors. Reform means continually improving governance, innovation, removing constraints, getting things done. Being better able to advocate for the Break O'Day area. Other examples are Latrobe, and even the West Tamar. Local communities really value local councils like these. Who are the owners of local government? The residents and ratepayers. The electors. Unless we start from that position, no reforms can succeed. A council is like a public company. Like TASSAL. Like MyState. A merger or takeover bid for another company has to start as a proposal taken to the board. A recommendation is then taken to the shareholders ( the residents) for a vote. In the case of the George Town - West Tamar merger, the George Town councillors were reluctant to see it go out to the community at that stage. As a board, that was their right, their duty even. I can understand that position, even though I disagreed. Every council in Tasmania, especially small councils, have a duty to safeguard their councils' capacity to be a means of empowerment for their community. How do we move forward? Get the process right from the start. It must be bottom up, it must accept that the community has to be the final decision makers through an elector poll. It must be collaborative, inclusive and continuous, not starting with predetermined results. Seeing the residents as a resource not a problem. That is the way forward. This will take time. Reform is difficult. But how much time and money has been wasted over the last 20 years going the wrong way? During that time the gains made have been from continuous improvement largely at council level. We can do so much more. Peter Kearney, West Tamar councillor

EDITOR'S NOTE: Defenders of the faith take note, its not broken and it certainly does not need fixing.