South Burnett Mayor Keith Campbell has described as “utter rubbish” a claim published on Facebook that councillors had been stopped from speaking to the public or the media.
A group which backed several unsuccessful candidates at the recent Local Government elections wrote recently:
The alleged bullying tactics within Council as told by one of our Divisional representatives of being threatened with a ‘5 months suspension’ if topics are discussed with ‘the public’ is illegal and cannot be allowed to continue. We had the repetitive spiel of ‘communication’ & ‘transparency’ each and every time over and over during their election campaign and even during the newly elected Mayor’s opening speech…. nothing has changed.
Mayor Campbell said councillors were free to speak, especially about issues affecting their portfolio roles.
He said some may request that questions be put in writing, especially those councillors that were still new to the process and “finding their feet”.
However, he admitted he would be disappointed if once Council had voted to decide an issue, councillors then spoke in the media against Council’s adopted position.
“However, he admitted he would be disappointed if once Council had voted to decide an issue, councillors then spoke in the media against Council’s adopted position.”
Even after the event a Councillor should be free to voice their opposition, its called Democracy!
Winning or losing an issue that gets discussed and then put to a vote is democracy. After that, spitting the dummy and having a whinge because you didn’t get your way is just childish.
Many things have been put to a vote and then later have been changed because of ongoing constructive discussion. It is not always a dummy spit or a whinge, many laws have been changed this way. I think it be childish to make the comment as stated by our new Mayor.
I would like to ask Richard where is quoting his source. If something is passed at any meeting, then that is that. Things are not changed unless it goes back to another meeting. I have never heard of such rubbish.
I do not disagree with you Michelle regarding the process for implementing a change after an initial decision, but you missed the point. If a Councillor disagrees with a majority decision it does not mean they have to accept the decision outright and not pursue a change through further ongoing discussion and then yes a return to a meeting. Democracy allows us a process for an elected representative to listen to the people they represent and seek change even when a Council/Government decision has been made to the contrary. An interesting example is an article from the grey nomads website http://www.thegreynomads.com.au/can-grey-nomad-power-force-camp-fee-u-turn/ The decision was overturned at a later meeting because a Councillor did not agree with the original decision and he then elected to listen to the people and get the decision reversed. A constructive democratic process. Would our Mayor be disappointed if one of our Councillors chose to stand against a Council decision in the same way, which may or may not involve being featured by the press?
I agree with Richard. Even after a decision is made the councillors should feel free to disclose their opinions whether in favor or not after all at the end of the day they are not council employee’s but elected representatives of their constituents and are there to represent their views and interests and not the councils.