CLICK ON THE IMAGE TO ENLARGE
These questions being posed by ex-alderman Mr. Basil Fitch are the kind of questions aldermen do not appear to be asking on behalf of their constituents. That is almost all aldermen except for Ald. Sands who it seems has been asking questions about tertiary sewerage treatment. If he hasn't had his questions entertained by the General Manager or Mayor he has certainly been openly advocating tertiary treatment for Launceston's sewerage.
If they are being asked then they are not being reported on in the press and that is a failure either on the part of the press or the aldermen collectively.
Aldermen, all in receipt of substantial 'aldermanic allowances', do not appear to be undertaking independent research on behalf of their constituency. Why does that seem to be so? Are they being discouraged from doing so? Is the quality of the advice coming to the aldermen from the city's management exemplary and/ faultless? How might constituents measure aldermanic KPIs – Key Performance Indicators?
The questions that flow from these questions goes to 'aldermanic productivity'. Similarly, if the aldermen are not doing the research and community consultation who is? Indeed, what 'actual' community consultation is going on apart from the potentially malleable Internet driven processes initiated by 'management'?
Furthermore, it seems that Council spends $3million to $4million on consultancies per annum. In fact, what cost benefits are actually derived from this expenditure and who is assessing it? Likewise, it seems that much/all of this 'out sourced advice' is confidential, why might that be so?
In fact it can be said that the burning question in Launceston, going by performance, is where are the aldermen and what are they actually doing?
No comments:
Post a Comment