Budget time and who does care about our future….
Sue Brooks June 21st, 2010
How on earth we can bring down a budget that won’t cause people grief? Personally speaking it is a challenge that I struggle with each and every year. Council is more or less in a no win position as no matter what we decide we will receive criticism. I believe the budget that we voted unanimously for today is a sensible one. Council has cut programmes and reduced spending where ever it can to reduce the burden on our rate payers but the challenge is to keep staff employed and deliver on the committments that are part and parcel of local government. It seems that the community wants more for less which is an unrealistic or unattainable goal, so while I am sure that this budget will be met with some criticism I hope that the community can look at it with an eye for fairness and objectivity and a belief that this Council is delivering the best outcome it can in an environment of restraint.
I personally have made public comment that I do not believe a $25 per property Environmental Levy, that doesn’t actually quarantine an amount for land acquisition, is not of my liking. I believe this levy is a cost shifting exercise that sees council keep general rates at a reasonable level of percentage increase while offsetting these costs via the increased environmental levy. At the end of the day everyone has to pay both a levy and the general rate and other charges so the reduced general rate increase is countered by an increased Environment Levy.
I wonder why we target the environment? Why not an economic development levy or a tourism levy or a roads levy? So personally speaking the environment seems to become a scapegoat for finding a way to retain income by shifting programmes, both operational and capital based, to this ‘new’ levy. Why is this so? Why isn’t the ‘environment’ treated just the same as every other aspect of Council activity? This new levy now pays for or funds many activities that were previously funded via the Capital Works budget funded via General Rates. I disagree with the increase in the Environmental Levy and also with the focus of the levy which is now not primarily for the purchase of land.
Today I also received an email from the State Government acknowledging my comment to the Open Space policy that they are developing…
“Dear Sue,
Thank you for your submission on the Draft Queensland Greenspace Strategy. Strong interest was shown in the Draft Strategy and your submission was one of 244 received. Feedback from all responses are currently being assessed to inform the final Queensland Greenspace Strategy. The reference number of your submission is Greenspace Submission # 62. If you have any questions regarding your submission, or progress of the Strategy please contact Mr John Rush on (07) 3235 4560″.
I found it disapointing that out of all the residents in Queensland only 244 submissions were received on this important issue. It really becomes apparent that without a voice we are all governed by a very small percentage of politicians making decisions based on a very small number of people who bother to have a say.
But on a happier note. I returned from Melb last night after visiting family. A few days away makes one appreciate just how lucky we are to be living in such a beautiful and climatically friendly part of the world. It is great to get away but ever so pleasing to arrive back home again. Thank goodness we can live in such a beautiful (and not too cold) part of this great wide brown (and green) land!
- Council related issues
- Comments(7)
Sue, do not be disappointed that only 244 people bothered to make “submissions” . They are the 244 people who have not yet woken up to the fact that submissions are received, nodded over , discussed, numbered, acknowledged ( by a computer generated email with your name and number entered into it ) printed, bound, filed, – and then ignored while government does what it had already decided to do. “Calling for submissions” is a smoke screen like calling for reports. It gives an appearance of dialogue and consideration where none exists.
“Levies” are just another sleight of hand. Like fuel levies by airlines which ‘compete’ in theory by lowering fares, and claw it back by putting on levies – so also do governments. At all levels. The really different thing about levies is is that levies are like poll taxes – the same weight falls on billionaire and pensioner regardless of ability to pay. Grossly unfair. Income taxes and property rates, whilst unpopular, at least accrue proportionally to the ability to pay. All is smoke and mirrors, and honest disclosure and fair treatment have passed their use by dates.
But some brave politicians, like you, soldier on in the generally ratbag field of politics and we admire you for it. Dont let the bastards grind you down.
Sue,
I agree with Colin. Having made many submissions on a range of topics eg councillors salaries, highrise developments etc and knowing of others who have submitted in the same vein, all needless to say ignored, why waste my time in future?
As to the latest rate increase: You state “Council has cut programmes and reduced spending”. I don’t like either action. If the programmes were worthwhile, why cut them?
Surely it would be better to go ahead with them for the betterment of our region? Just increase the rates a little more to cover cost.
As to reducing costs, one would have to ask, why were council wasting money to start with? You can only reduce costs by increasing efficiency or reducing services, there is no other way. Which is it in our case?
Sadman
Thanks Colin and Sadman. Please do waste your time in the future.. Even though we often do feel we aren’t rewarded by action when we do make comment and enter into discussion with all layers of Government, it is important that we don’t give up. I listen to comment and truly try to make decisions based on majority views. I don’t try and guess so if I don’t receive much comment I have little feedback or input by which to make my decisions. If the silent majority want to remain silent they will not be represented so if they then complain post the decison making process I don’t have too much sympathy for them..
Also times and people change and we shouldn’t judge present activities based on past experiences.
Sue,
I think that you may have missed the point that Sadman and Colin were trying to make. You said, “I listen to comment and truly try to make decisions based on majority views”, but what they are saying is that their submissions and comments are clearly NOT the majority. You yourself received confirmation of your submission to the tune of, “Strong interest was shown in the Draft Strategy and your submission was one of 244 received.”. “Strong interest”? How is 244 classified as “strong interest”? I feel that Colin is right when he says that “Calling for submissions” is just a smoke screen. However, I do agree with you that we can’t just sit back and do nothing.
The point I am trying to make is that if we don’t bother to have a say about things we more or less lose the right to complain afterwards…. Also that there is not enough comment being made in relation to topics of interest and future policy/legislation by the general public to their governments. It is difficult to remain enthusiastic about having your say if you think you aren’t being listened to but the alternative is to do nothing which I believe is undesirable.
Hey Sue, I’d just like to put a point to you. You say that if we don’t bother to have a say about things, we more or less lose the right to complain afterwards. But, when I do have a say, you tell me I’m “negative” or “predominantly critical” (and that’s just what you’ve called me in the past month on this site). I know I’m not the easiest person to get along with at first, but it’s a bit hard when you’re told that if you don’t complain you have no right to a say, but if you do complain you are negative and critical. Not everyone has the “gift of the gab” with their writings like you. Know what I mean?
Emily I believe in constructive criticism about issues. I don’t like or support personal attacks and criticism that is focussed on the individual person rather than an issue. Speaking, or I should say writing, on a blog anonymously is one type of communication but to properly be heard and influence change I think we all need to voice our opinions in a constructive and positive manner and by using the appropriate processes when they are provided for us. For example if a a development is occurring and you see the sighn boards go up you can have a say about that development. If you don’t bother to have a say then complaining about it afterwards is a bit rich I believe. At least that is my philosophy although I am the first to admit I’m far from perfect and get annoyed with other people just as we all do at times. I also totally detest dishonesty.