COMMENT
It is refreshing to start to
see serious investigation of Launceston Council's modus operandi.
It is way past time that it might be and quite probably 'The Examiner' is
looking to increase its readership.
Rumour had it that 'council
management' had a 'cosy relationship with the paper' and when anyone looks at
council's budget there is an extraordinary commitment to marketing/propaganda.
Ponder that!
Not so very long ago an
Examiner journalist was 'disappeared' basically for writing an "unfriendly
article". If you are pulling the strings one needs this sort of thing to
keep the underlings in line.
Now that there are some signs
that The Examiner has hit the refresh button ratepayers need to be sending in
their Letters to the Editor. Let it not be said that what is published is a
refl;ection of the community’s lack of concern.
While we are here, ratepayer
might want to pay close attention to who are not turning up to meetings but are
nonetheless attending their bank to collect what some regard as ‘pocket money’. Also try and phone a councillor to see where
that gets you and report in. Over to you on this one!
TWO LETTER FROM TODAY'S PAPER
City of Launceston
IT WAS astounding to read (The Examiner, October 26) Launceston's council being quizzed regarding its extraordinary expenditure on external experts.
Nonetheless, the list of external consultants is much larger than is being indicated.
What was less surprising was the implausible hollow bureaucratic rhetoric offered by the City of Launceston general manager Michael Stretton in response to the criticism being aimed squarely at the council.
There is something in the order of $80,000 plus per week tucked away in various council budget allocations ready to fund what now looks like secret discretionary spending. If it appears as if this expenditure is irregular and there is an arrogant disregard for transparency.
Ratepayers have taken their concerns to the Ombudsman, the Minister, the Director of Local Government and indeed the Auditor General That this goes without a mention, it must tell us something. Albeit late in the day, the press' new-found will to expose bureaucratic secrecy is welcomed by ratepayers and others.
Ray Norman, Launceston.
Consultants Data
DOES it not surprise anybody else that the City of Launceston council does not record data from external consultants? It doesn't surprise me. The data would possibly show how or what to do properly but does not fit the thoughts and the agenda of the managers or councillors. I would also like to know how and who their "tender for work invitations" is finalised and sent to.
City of Launceston general manager Michael Stretton says it is a $110 million business. Much more than this is tendered out and spent. A business of this size would usually have external auditors look at every aspect of a business. Does the council have this process in place each year? The amount of ratepayer funds spent on malls, playgrounds, sports fields and handouts to all and sundry for concerts, sporting events etc needs to be reined in.
How many millions have been spent on consultants for malls, sewer system, Tamar River etc? It's enough to put a tear in one's eye, not only a waste of other people's money but also the lack of record-keeping, that can be checked by authorities and others outside the council.
One thing I can count on with the council is higher rates and never ceases to amaze me on how much and on what projects large amounts of funding (money) seems to be given away willfully without consultation with the people who pay their wages.
Steve Rogers, South Launceston.
No comments:
Post a Comment