SUDDENLY THERE ARE LOSSES AND ITS AN ELECTION

Suddenly there are losses to to be explained away at election time in the Launceston municipality and who would have thunk such a thing was possible. Who would have thunk it!

It gets 'interestinger and interestinger' when at the end of the fiscal year the City of Launceston turned in a $3.5Million plus surplus.

AND THEN, in just four months here we are with a $3.5Million operational loss, and growing potentially, after the Auditor General had checked the books. As they say in backrooms all over the place, "how the hell did that happen?" Shonky bookkeeping? AND, how could it possibly happen at election time?

Operationally, that's approximately $7Million turnaround in four months which in anyone's book is, spectacular. when the city's budget is somewhere in the order of $107Million. 

So, the cumulative 'loss looks like it is thus far', something in the order of 7% of the current operational budget.  BUT, there is unfinished civic works all over the place – Civic Square, The Mall, Riverbend Park, Utas and possibly more still.

On TV on Friday evening's news, Mayor van Zetten acknowledged the loss, and given the sensitivity of the timing, he was 'smoothing over' the situation with the construction work for Riverbend Park working away behind him sucking up the dollars. Beforehand in the Examiner, Ald. Hugh McKenzie was talking up, and trying to hose down community concerns, saying "budget overruns are “unfortunate”, but sometimes unavoidable, ... [when he moved] unanimous motion to see the council adjust its budget" [Link]. 

Before the current Council's last meeting before a new Council is installed the General Manager, Michael Stretton, was in the press hosing down 'community concerns' saying that the' "City of Launceston council’s long term financial plan is “stable”, despite a number of budget changes proposed in the council’s agenda."[Link]

If all this was to be in contention, and without there being a council election in it's final throes, it would be concerning enough. If nothing changes Launceston's ratepayers appear to have more than ever to worry about as 'their council' – governance-wise and operationally – is appearing to be increasingly fiscally flamboyant – and irrationally so. Something that can be entertained if you are able, as council mostly is, to conscript whatever monies it desires – and for whatever purpose too apparently.

Some weeks ago, Geoff Smedly put up the proposition in the Examiner's Letters, paraphrased,  that 'Launceston needed an inquiry as much as, or even more than, an election'. Anyone closely scrutinising the city's 'municipal' affairs'  would  most likely agree. 

As time unfolds, and more and more money is spent/committed, as time unfolds and a place's elective representative are more and more likely to be  representing personal interests and aspirations than much else. As time unfolds aldermen should be required to be functionally accountable and it would seem that the likes of Geoff Smedley are right on the money in suggesting that 'Launceston needs an inquiry' much more than election to flush away self serving representatives disinclined to represent the interests of their constituents.

Put away the smoke bombs, stop flashing the mirrors and spare us the clap trap and humbug ,just bring on the inquiry ASAP!                                                          

IMPORTANT CIVIC MATTER NEEDS RESPONSE

NOW HERE ARE THE PRESS LINKS

• ABC Tasmanian woman waits six months to have gangrenous foot amputated ... Tasmanian pensioner Gail Reynolds is in hospital recovering from the surgery she had to amputate most of her right foot and left big toe after they became gangrenous. Key points Gail Reynolds' surgery for gangrene was delayed three times Her foot was amputated six months after doctors told her she needed the procedure It comes amid increased pressure on the Royal Hobart Hospital, where ED numbers have doubled in the past 12 years Photos of the 70-year-old diabetic's blackened, septic feet are too graphic to be shown. Her family is speaking out, angry and aghast at what has unfolded.... READ ON CLICK HERE

• ABC Woman lashes 'third-world' Tasmanian health system after 34 hours in emergency ... READ ON CLICK HERE

• EXAMINER Emergency department woes at Launceston General Hospital ... An inquiry into the state’s health services has heard the Launceston General Hospital’s emergency department has the highest mortality rate in the state. LGH accident and emergency nurse unit manager Scott Rigby told a Legislative Council sub-committee the hospital’s emergency department had been acknowledged as the worst in the country twice in the past four years. ........... The federal government’s My Hospitals website showed less than half of the patients in need of hospital admission met the four-hour target and 50 per cent of patients waited seven hours and 35 minutes in 2016-17. ........... The department consists of 42 beds with five isolated beds to help with flow-through. ........... "The rest of the beds are mostly full," Mr Rigby said. ........... "The start of the day will have 33 to 36 people in the department and we see 130 a day." ........... He said the LGH had spent the majority of this year at level three escalation, which was known to be the highest level of escalation, primarily because of bed block. ........... Mr Rigby said with bed block, a person in emergency could become even more acutely unwell. ........... "Then you are scrambling to give that person the best care you can," he said. ........... Mr Rigby said nobody had died while waiting for a bed, but the hospital had the highest mortality rate out of all state hospital emergency departments. ........... The Australian Nursing and Midwifery Federation has provided data to the inquiry which showed up to 16 per cent of admitted patients waiting for at least 24 hours for a bed. ........... Since the start of this year, two patients have waited between 96 and 120 hours, 37 patients waited between 72 and 96 hours, and 47 patients have waited between 60 and 72 hours. ........... The union said mental health patients also experienced long waits in the LGH emergency department. ........... One adolescent spent almost three days in the department with no care plan or a psychiatry team to take over for the patient, it said. ........... Mr Rigby said emergency department workers tended to be used to working in a challenging environment but they were increasingly calling out for more help as they felt strained and isolated. ........... Health Complaints Commissioner Richard Connock told the inquiry on Friday complaints to the commission had increased over recent years in all areas of the health service. ... https://www.examiner.com.au/story/5675379/high-mortality-in-lgh-emergency-department/

IMPORTANT ELECTION INFORMATION FOR LAUNCESTON

ADVERTISEMENT

TAKE NOTE LAUNCESTON COUNCIL BUDGET STUFF UP

T

This council in Launceston is hopeless, no doubt. At its meeting on 22nd October it was revealed council have overrun the 2018-19 budget by $3.5m in 4 months. The good aldermen must be looking forward to the inquiry that bound to come out of this given all the money that has been thrown at the city. Let us see what happens and what will be revealed in the current political climate. If you vote this same mob back into council, your rate increase could be 10% or more - an average of $150 per year. 

IN THE EXAMINER City of Launceston council’s long term financial plan is “stable”, despite a number of budget changes proposed in the council’s agenda, the general manager Michael Stretton says. ........... The agenda for Monday’s meeting states there will be a decreased revenue of more than $1 million, but Mr Stretton said there is no need for panic. ........... The changes are related to information the council has received from the auditor general. ........... Mr Stretton said the auditor general advised the council works in the capital budget, such as master plans and the planning scheme, were assets that could be capitalised on. ........... “They’re saying that’s an operational cost, so it needs to be counted in the operational budget. It just means we’re adjusting the budget to reflect those changes,” he said. ........... Quotes received by the council for Riverbend Park were the “most significant” change, Mr Stretton said. ........... “They have come in significantly higher than what we estimated, so we’ve had to defer some capital works,” he said. ........... When the project was scoped out a number of years ago it was originally estimated to cost $9 million, but was now expected to cost $11.5 million. ........... Planned and budgets upgrades to the council building and a number of other projects have been deferred to ensure the park is delivered to the community as promised. ........... “There will be a operational deficit, that’s pretty much guaranteed and in terms of the overall, everything taken into account it’s marginal at this point,” Mr Stretton said. ........... “We recorded a $3.5 million surplus last year, so if you look in the swings and roundabouts of it, over the long term it will be sustainable.”

C

LAUNCESTON COUNCIL STUFF UP REVEALED AS POLLS CLOSE

CLICK HERE TO GO TO THE EXAMINER

City of Launceston council to discuss budget changes Tarlia Jordan 

 City of Launceston council’s long term financial plan is “stable”, despite a number of budget changes proposed in the council’s agenda, the general manager Michael Stretton says. ............. The agenda for Monday’s meeting states there will be a decreased revenue of more than $1 million, but Mr Stretton said there is no need for panic. ............. The changes are related to information the council has received from the auditor general. ............. Mr Stretton said the auditor general advised the council works in the capital budget, such as master plans and the planning scheme, were assets that could be capitalised on. ............. “They’re saying that’s an operational cost, so it needs to be counted in the operational budget. It just means we’re adjusting the budget to reflect those changes,” he said. ............. Quotes received by the council for Riverbend Park were the “most significant” change, Mr Stretton said. ............. “They have come in significantly higher than what we estimated, so we’ve had to defer some capital works,” he said. ............. When the project was scoped out a number of years ago it was originally estimated to cost $9 million, but was now expected to cost $11.5 million. ............. Planned and budgets upgrades to the council building and a number of other projects have been deferred to ensure the park is delivered to the community as promised. ............. “There will be a operational deficit, that’s pretty much guaranteed and in terms of the overall, everything taken into account it’s marginal at this point,” Mr Stretton said. ............. “We recorded a $3.5 million surplus last year, so if you look in the swings and roundabouts of it, over the long term it will be sustainable.”

YES, YES, but given where we are should ratepayers be looking the other way as it seems the alderpeople may have been! Be aware, be alert, SPINincoming!!

BREAKING NEWS ...WATCH THIS SPACE ... NOW WITH UPDATE

Watch this space for further developments

BASIL FITCH'S UPDATE

UTAS BACK TO NEWNHAM! It is now been established that the building of Utas will be completed by 2022. This will be SEVEN years after signing the memorandum of understanding and STILL NOT A SPADE has been put into the Inveresk site. ................. All the spruikers of this con job wanted to commence building in 2015/16, stating how it was going to be the best thing ever for Launceston. Peter Gutwein said 3000 new jobs – WHERE are they? ................. LCC said it was going to open up all the closed shops in the CBD and create inner city living – WHERE are they Mayor and aldermen? ................. Businesses have said that they are HURTING right now! .................The Mayor said that university parking would be available at the Show Society and Market grounds – so WHERE is it? (bearing in mind we need 2000 spaces according to the Planning Scheme and Code!)................. The traffic management plan is now released and in Saturday’s Examiner. This is just the beginning. WHERE is state growth’s traffic count from the Kmart to Bunnings? If Utas goes ahead it will bring 1500 cars from Newnham. WHERE are all of these cars going to go? ................. With comments from the general manager “these improvements won’t solve all the problems” what will it really look like when the new campus opens? ................. And with traffic in the area which “doesn’t function well now” or “has seen traffic flow impacted for several years” and needs “safer, dedicated pedestrian points” - could we really believe any LCC promises anyway if their traffic flow impact assessment wasn’t accurate for the existing developments in the area at the time council approved all of them? They MUST BE DREAMIN’.................. I call on all interested parties who travel the Charles/Tamar (Victoria) St bridges to take interest in the Council’s movements who are trying to dumb things down to hide what is really going on. .................It is now clear to me why Utas are prolonging any building movements here in Launceston as the Hobart Utas accommodation block of 400 units is going to be built and then all the major courses out at Newnham will be transferred bit by bit to Hobart campus (which you will note has already commenced).................. When the transfers are made, Launceston Utas will become a VOCATIONAL facility ONLY which is designed to create a greater financial flow to Utas. Universities are now run as a business (unfortunately) and that is why the fees are becoming so high to the point where I feel sorry for the students of tomorrow from low income families struggling to make ends meet by being forced to travel and stay in Hobart. ................. The Utas accommodation units in Launceston are $192 per week! ................. Unfortunately the LCC have become politicised in this whole affair. I know because I have witnessed this over the last 3.5 years while observing the current council. I have on numerous occasions warned them that this will happen and that the state government would essentially control aspects of the LCC.

Yes – a BIG CLEAN OUT please! If you have not voted already, IT IS NOT TOO LATE. 

To make sure it arrives by the deadline, please post your ballot by this Thursday. 

Please give me your number 1 vote and I promise to work to resolve this mess. You will receive true value for money as I will not be taking up the alderman salary of $36k. Best regards, Basil.

COUNCIL CANDIDATURE FOR LAUNCESTON

Way, way too late as it is The Examiner has this week been dragging out candidate information for the Council and it is time to call-out the process in play such as it is. Whilst there is much to cause mirth equally there is a great deal revealing itself that should give all Launcestonians serious reasons for concern. The incumbents have been imbibing at the CIVICtrough, and in many instances, for quite a long time. 

Despite all that the candidates collectively have, in their statements, given their constituency not the slightest reason to expect anything than more, and more of the same old, same old.

In their case, its an example of 'not happy Jan' given that when we vote in Local Govt. elections we're not just voting for individuals to do this or that, rather we should be voting for an agenda – for a platform and/or a 'philosophic purpose'. By-and-large, searching for such things in the superficial incumbent candidates' statements is unedifying with perhaps the exception of the Mayor's audacious contribution  –  that's a doozy! Back to that later.

The story is pretty much the same for the aspirant candidates who one assumes are 'browned-off' by what the incumbents have been dealing out for the past four years except in the case of what is forming up to be a 'core group' of credible aspirants.

All-in-all, the crop of candidates on show – 32 strong as it is – have been the victims of an underwhelming press response. If one was a cynic it'd be possible to muster such emptiness and then seek forgiveness, based on an assumption that the 'backroom collective' are pitching for more and more of the same.

Typically these people play their cards very close but the Mayor seems to have blown their cover. in promising to "invite the hidden – and the well-known - leaders to form a Launceston Action Team. We’ll find out what you, the people of Launceston, are passionate about and support you to make the changes". Is he telling us that, if he is elected, he'll finally bring those who have been pulling his strings, his chosen few, out into the open to do what the electorate has appointed him to do, rather the Council to do? Is he really?

The Mayor's 'elect-me-spin', if he's elected, is to enlist a 'team of right minded leaders' – a DREAMteam?. Clearly, this is a signal that Council may already have the backing of such a 'team' right now.

So, is 'the Mayor' perhaps seeking to bring these 'hidden leaders' out from the darkness of the backroom in order that for the next 4 years they can more happily circumvent aldermanic and public scrutiny and accountability? One would hope not!

Voting for candidates based on too little, or no information, is the outcome of a badly broken system.

The various candidates statements typically tell us nothing relative to a policy of any kind. Almost always it is a collection of 'motherhood mumblings'. A voter trying to separate between candidate (A) and candidate (Y) needs to be a clairvoyant.

The candidates generally do not have publicly available contact information to enable comparison of their positions on matters of interest. What is this telling us? How can one to vote for change?

Yet how can anyone vote for more of the same when history tells us, and our bank accounts tell us, the Council has been conscripting our money with spurious outcomes – and now seemingly hatched by unelected and unaccountable outsiders behind closed doors masquerading as a 'team of right minded leaders'.

Ray Norman October 19 2018

INTRODUCING LAUNCESTON COUNCIL'S 2018 CANDIDATES

In the interests of access & equity LCC NEWS is copying this information here for those who do not or cannot subscribe to The Examiner online and/or those who do not and cannot have access to the hardcopy of the publication. Moreover, this information will remain at this URL for future reference.

The Examiner asked each candidate running in the City of Launceston council local government election to supply our readers with statement about themselves. 

The statement asked why the candidate chose to run, and what they would like to achieve. Candidates were also asked to supply their favourite quote, a fun fact or who would play them in a movie.

In these elections, City of Launceston council has 32 candidates, 11 of those are seeking re-election, eight running for mayor and eight for deputy mayor. 

More than 47,000 people are registered to vote in the City of Launceston municipality. .. .... CLICK HERE TO ACCESS THE NOTES

TIME FOR SOME INTERVENTION AND ACCOUNTABILITY

Questions are being asked about the level of expenditure in regard to some candidate's election campaigns. 

The word is "let's see where this all goes, anyway it's much easier to say sorry than it is to seek permission." If that's indicative of our future we may not have much to look forward to except more bureaucratic opacity and as for 'accountability', well that'll be discretionary as usual.

This all needs some serious investigation but let's see if what is needed get to put in place!

IF you haven't voted yet, please do and please vote carefully as some people seem to have quite bit at stake and imaginations are running wild as to why that might be.

IT'S A JUNGLE OUT THERE!

 

• And the Examiner is not reporting the stories so it is said around the traps.
• LOOK around, take note and form an opinion. 
• Then vote according to your conscience.

It's a bit late for 'Virtue Signalling' isn't it?

THIS IS TODAY... I suppose that it is not all that surprising that election candidates might be unsubtle enough to indulge in a spot of VIRTUE SIGNALLING but what fools do they imagine that you are, indeed the electorate is, that anyone might swallow this stuff uncritically and vote for them accordingly.

Now that is an interesting idea – voting accordingly and uncritically – given that in Launceston about the only thing on show to do with Local Govt. is 'virtue signalling'. A cynic would spot this stuff right-up and cynics get called out and are usually misunderstood.

A wise sage, paraphrased, is quoted as saying "cynicism is just a rough way of telling the truth". A cynic right now in the municipality of the 'City of Launceston' has quite a bit see and to 'speak roughly about'.

Now take 'POWER DRESSING' for instance, and say 'the tie' or 'not the tie' or 'colour', 'baseball caps', 'lipstick', 'the suit' or 'not the suit', 'fancy dress', and oh my goodness 'shorts and a footy jumper', 'old casuals in Ravo'. etc. etc. etc. Along with 'talking heads' it's on display whenever you look.

You are well advised to be alert to the language of 'virtue' and then think critically - very critically. However, there're some who are a bit aware and are personally avoiding 'personal appearances' for 'virtue's sake' – and safety's sake.

If these 'devices' are being used you have a clue as to just what is at stake – an income opportunity typically. For the occasion, "I'm one of you" or  'I'm at one with you"and usually that is as far from reality as Lagos and New York are 'apart'. There are several expletives available for use here but I'll resist.

Then comes 'the gunnadoooz' all of which, for incumbents, is delusional fiction because if it meant anything we'd all know about it and be able to measure the progress 'in real time'. 

For the aspirants it simply signals a level of naivety commensurate with grandeur of 'the promise'. In the end all that a hapless voter can do is be aware, very, very, aware that this 'game playing' is going on and remember all that's been promised and not delivered or run a 'credibility check-cum-fact check' for most of this stuff. 

Confucius says, "He who speaks without modesty will find it difficult to make his words good."  And, Criss Jami, Killosophy tells us, “Tolerance! The virtue that makes one bite his tongue so that he can tear out his hair.”

Tandra Vale October 17 

THE COUNT TODAY 

47309

Launceston City

14970

31.64%

VOTE CAREFULLY, VERY, VERY, CAREFULLY

SOURCE GO TO:http://kevinbonham.blogspot.com/2018/10/council-voting-please-be-careful.html?m=1

CONTEXT: If 'change' is what you are voting for this is recommended reading given the vagaries of the Tasmanian electoral system. A change of personnel is all we'll get at this election but it will be a step along the way if real change is to eventually happen and in a meaningful way.

The Local Govt. model in Tasmania is well and truly broken. Much of this is down to our elected representatives disinclination to be accountable and transparent – not to mention their non-performance in so many instances.

It appears as if the only way Local Govt's dysfunctionalism can be addressed is incrementally.

So, if change is on your agenda take very good care and Dr Kevin Bonham's advice may well be helpful.

Council Voting - Please Be Careful!

Dr Kevin Bonham

I've already made this point in my Hobart guide but I thought I should make it prominently in a separate post to cover all councils. Please feel very free to share and spread widely.

A scourge of Tasmanian council elections is the high rate of informal voting. Informal votes are votes that are returned but cannot be counted as they are not valid votes. The main reason the informal voting rate is high is that voters make mistakes and the rules concerning this are stupid. The reason the rules are stupid is that governments have failed to fix them. The previous Labor/Greens government ignored warnings that bringing in all-in all-out elections would cause a high informal voting rate under the current system. The current Liberal government has so far done nothing to fix it. The Local Government Act needs to be reformed to provide savings provisions for voters who make honest mistakes.

When you get your ballot papers in the mail, the ballot paper for Councillors will have an instruction at the top saying "Number the boxes from 1 to [some number] in order of your choice". At the bottom it says "Number at least [some other number] boxes to make your vote count". The first number is the number of candidates, the second is the number to be elected.

What the instructions don't tell you is that if you make a mistake before you get to that second (minimum) number, your vote won't be counted - at all!

So for instance, Hobart is electing 12 councillors. You can number up to 36 boxes but for your vote to count you need to at least number the boxes 1 to 12 once and once only. If you include any of those numbers more than once, your vote is invalid and will not count at all. If you skip any of those numbers, your vote is invalid and will not count at all. So for instance, if you put two number 8s but no number 9 on a Hobart councillor paper, that's it, your vote will not be valid. Even had you made just one of these two mistakes, your vote would not count. I personally saw huge piles of ballot papers rejected for these sorts of reasons in 2014. 

Especially, do not think "oh I really can't find 12 candidates, I'll just pick 11, surely that's good enough?" It isn't. It's the same as posting in a blank ballot.

If you make a mistake involving doubling or omitting numbers after the minimum number, that's not such a big deal. Don't let that put you off numbering as many boxes as you want to. A mistake after the minimum number just means that if your vote gets to the point where you made the mistake (which depending on your preference ordering might not happen anyway) then at that point your vote will exhaust from the system. It may be that much of your vote's value has been used up helping people get elected by that stage anyway.

It's especially easy to omit or double numbers if you like voting from the bottom up, which lots of us do.

One way to avoid these sorts of errors is to practice voting on a separate sheet of paper (or spreadsheet) first. Once you have an order you can check it by listing the numbers from 1 to the number of candidates on another piece of paper, and going through your practice vote from the top, crossing off each number as it appears. If you go to cross off a number and find you've already crossed it off, that probably means you've doubled up somewhere. If a number doesn't get crossed off, look for that number and see if you've missed it.

If you make a mistake on your actual ballot paper, and you're using a pen, you can correct it by crossing the incorrect number out and writing the correct one. (Pencil is much easier, since you can just erase it, and there's no reason not to use pencil.) But if you do this make sure it is very clear what your actual voting order is.

As to the question of numbering all of the boxes vs only some of them - assuming you have time to consider it - I almost always number all of the boxes. The important thing to remember if there are several candidates you don't like, is that how you rank the candidates at the bottom of the list will never help any of them beat candidates who you ranked higher - but it may help the candidate you see as the lesser evil defeat one you really can't stand. If you have ranked a candidate 30th out of 36, your vote cannot reach them or help them until everyone you ranked 1 to 29 has been elected or eliminated. However, it might then help them beat those you have ranked 31 to 36.