Does the truth hurt?
Sue Brooks February 4th, 2010
What really, really annoys me is that this whole infrastructure charges and other development related issues is turning into a tit for tat exercise. Surely we should not have to resort to this behaviour? But what else can we do ponders I?
Many, many people still believe what they read within the pages of their trusted local newspaper. I used to believe what I read in the paper and every fibre of my being still wants to believe that what the Chronicle, and other newspapers tell me, is true. But very, very sadly I have to say this is not what happens. You cannot and should not believe everything you read in the media. This inability to trust what we read makes me very sad because many stories are accurate. How then do we tell the difference? How do we develop trust in our media?
Don’t we all want to work and live in a happy, positive region that strikes a good balance between growth and the resulting employment prospects while protecting our unique lifestyle and natural environment. Nobody wants to stifle appropriate development but rather we should encourage and invite it.
So maybe, just maybe we could ask the Chronicle to help us on this journey. Maybe Mr Peter Chapman will take a look around and see where he could grow his readership. It appears that Hervey Bay has a much lower percentage of readers than some other areas and as Hervey Bay is rapidly growing in size, maybe this is the potential market. But many, many people I speak to from Hervey Bay refuse to pay for ’sensationalist rubbish’ as I have had the paper described to me on many occassions recently.
I truly believe the media has a responsibility greater than that of just ‘making money’. Yes it must be profitable or we wouldn’t have a daily paper but maybe it could be profitable and a bit more truthful at the very same time? Yes I know that headlines screaming about gloom, doom, cheaters, tragedies, court cases and disasters ’sell papers’ but at what cost? If I was growing up today and was constantly bombarded by all these negative stories would I believe I was growing up into a positive, caring and clever society? I reckon many of our youth ‘troubles’ involving anti social behaviour are because our youth want to disconnect from a society they see as being bad and dishonest. Who wants to live in a world full of cheats and with your local government apparently trying to rip you off and telling you lies? But these are the messages front and centre of nearly every news media day in day out.
So I ask our Chronicle editor to maybe take a look at the Hervey Bay Independent. Scott Rowe is back behind the helm of this free paper. He seems to be attracting advertisers and has a very large readership. Yes the paper is free but I would prefer to spend my dollars on a publication that contains many positive stories and informative stories about my city. It celebrates the good things and the good people and yes believe it or not, there are many, many good happy stories worth hearing about. Stories that uplift instead of depress!
I am very sad that Council is taking a bashing recently. We just can’t seem to be doing anything right according to the Chronicle. Well I believe while not perfect, Council does many things well. With everybodys help just maybe we can improve and improve and improve till we are the very best Council in the country. This is my aim. I will do whatever I can to work with anyone who can help to make our region and our Council a positive, happier, friendlier and efficient place to live, work and do business with. An impossible task? I don’t think so. We aren’t perfect and most likely will never be perfect but we can certainly try to be a little bit better every single day!
So for those of you that keep asking me for the truth or ‘what Council really did’ here is our official Council media release which resulted after the Editor of the Chronicle declined an invitation to meet with senior staff and possibly learn some facts about our region. I think the invitation is still open!
Council Media Release
Editor declines meeting with CEO on Trunk Infrastructure contributions
4 Feburary 2010 The editor of the Fraser Coast Chronicle has declined an invitation to meet with the Fraser Coast Regional Council CEO and the Director of Organisational Services to talk about trunk infrastructure contributions.
The CEO, Andrew Brien, made the offer on Tuesday (February 2) after a series of articles in the Fraser Coast Chronicle which alleged the Council was facing a financial crisis due to a lack of infrastructure charges collected from developers.
In an emailed response that was not published by the Chronicle, Mr Brien offered to meet with the editor and Chronicle journalists to discuss some of the inaccuracies that had been reported.The Chronicle’s editor, Peter Chapman, declined the Council offer to discuss Trunk Infrastructure.“Obviously we have done extensive research and talked to a number of experts in this field over the past 48 hours,” Mr Chapman said.“I now feel we are up to speed with the matter and as such feel no need for the meeting.”Fraser Coast CEO Andrew Brien said he was disappointed that the Chronicle did not want to talk to the Council.
“It seems the Chronicle with a number of ‘experts’, none of whom are associated with Council, does not want to hear our side of the story.”
The Council is not facing a funding crisis resulting from a decrease in Trunk Infrastructure contributions paid by developers, Mr Brien said.Trunk Infrastructure contributions collected from developers are used to provide trunk infrastructure to a development whether it is a high-rise development on the Esplanade, an industrial estate or a residential subdivision.The infrastructure charges are not used to fund parks or facilities in other areas, maintenance or improvement of existing facilities; that work is budgeted for as part of the Council’s $65 million capital works program which is funded from general rates, other fees and charges and grants.The trunk infrastructure funded by developers’ contributions includes the main roads and large pipes that connect new developments to existing services.While developers contribute towards 70% of the cost of new trunk infrastructure, the remainder of funding is sourced from loans, grants and general rates.
- Chronicle comment , Council related issues
- Comments(15)
Sue
At first I welcomed the arrival of the new broom at the Chronicle. I believe its former editor was far too cosy with you lot (and more so council’s water subsidiary) and I feel that individual was largely responsible for the lack of desperately needed fresh blood on council.
It seems the new editor at the Chronicle wants to up his readership by tapping in to the perception in the community that our Councillors are failing us.
Funnily, I seem to recall one his responses to a letter writer not that long ago was that it was not the role of the Chronicle to influence council direction yet only a few weeks later he is clearly and blatantly trying to do that.
Today’s article on the development in Granville only continues to fuel that fire and again I’ll say it, if the developers in Granville expect to get their projects off the ground, they need to build a bridge – literally!
We can compare all we like to other regions but an associate of mine said last week that he believed there was enough approved resitdential developments on the Fraser Coast to supply demand for the next 25 years! If this is indeed true, perhaps the UDIA or the Chronicle can explain where these developers are and why they have not acted on their approvals? Council can not be blamed on the lack of progress – they’ve done their bit but the market demand is not there.
I feel there is a bigger need for new and sustainable industries and jobs on the Fraser Coast before we start to even think about carving up more land for residential estates and retirement villages. No point having more residents in our wonderful region if we don’t have the jobs!
Well said Sue – no individual is perfect, therefore no organisation can be perfect.
We all agree that every service industry can improve and sometimes things do go wrong but we live with it. The problem at the moment is that most people only get to hear the doom and gloom from the paper.
Do you have any ideas as yet as to how the Council can get past that and get something positive in the media? May I suggest that Council starts up a subscription service (free of course) so that people could have more regular updates from Council. I often check the media releases but not as often as I see the paper so it would be good to keep them in front of peoples minds more often.
Good to see that the CEO and senior staff are prepared to meet and provide information, but it is a pity that the paper did not take up the offer.
Keep up the good work Sue, its a pity more Councillors don’t do the same.
Ben I couldn’t agree more. I believe part of the reason for a slowdown in development specifically in Hervey Bay, is demand. We have countless residential building blocks approved and developed and For Sale. We also have many numbers of Unit developments approved and not commenced yet. So we more than likely have an issue of over supply. it would be good to hear from our Chambers of Commerce and other Government dept reps as to how to better encourage some industry or employment type of development. before you mention Industry I might add that we have heaps of Industrial zoned land for sale also. i believe economic and market forces are much more relevant to a ’slowdown’ debate than any imposed infrastructure charges.
Anne It is very difficult to get a fair go in the Chronicle recently. it seems that truth is boring and doesn’t sell newspapers. I expect that the Hervey Bay Independent will benefit as we may focus more on them for accurate reporting. I wonder if The Indy can grow to Maryborough? I will ask the editor.
Council does list all our media releases on our web site. We also have a link to our ‘enews’. To join up you will see the link in the bottom left hand side of the home page. Thanks for your thoughtful contribution. Sue
Hi Sue,
At the risk of being banned from comment, I would have to say the most disburbing aspect of this affair has been the lack of maturity being shown. I think it is obvious to all that the paper should have accepted the invitation. The editor has lost his credibility in pursing the matter now (and I would not begrudge the councillors and the executives some satisfaction).
However, let’s not forget that the inial screaming headline came from the CEO not addressing question from the media, waving it away with “the information is on the website” and “my media officer is away”. Now we have a self-serving media relaese (the media officer is obviously back from leave), and comments posted here that suggest the councillors intend to pick up their toys and go and play with the Indy.
Is it a case of veilled threats to prevent any adverse commentary?
I realise I’m a guest here, but really, aren’t we all a bit more grown up?
HappyMan so far I have banned no one from comment. I try to not censor and will only step in if I believe someone is being derogatory. So welcome to the blog.
The Chronicle usually asks Council to comment on a series of questions within a few hours. Rarely more than 8 hours and most often before 3pm in the afternoon. This is a problem for Council when the people with the info required are actually working which usually means meetings etc. Newspapers have a very short window in which they write stories. With a story as important as the infrastructure charges maybe they could have given Council a bit more time. Also you and I will never know what the actual response from the CEO was. I am confident his comment would have been part of a longer response.
Also when Council does respond the Chronicle picks and chooses what it uses. I have little to no confidence that Council will be portrayed accurately in the Chronicle just now.
Lastly the Chronicle sends a reporter to every Council meeting. That reporter hears first hand what is said and what is decided at Council. Toni McCrea who is writing all the Council stories does not attend Council meetings. Go figure! I also think that in this day and age journalists should be able to hop onto our web site and find some information for themselves rather than being spoon fed.
In closing I thought the Council media release was accurate not self serving. How is the truth self serving?
So now you want the Chronicle to be full of puff pieces like the Independent? The Independent isn’t an example of positive media – it is almost wholey and solely press releases and no real stories. But I guess that would suit the council – to never, ever be questioned. At least the Chronicle has a go and challenges the council and other organisations in the area. It’s not the role of the Chronicle to inspire rainbows and lollipops. Maybe there should be a bit of acknowledgement of that from the council.
It should also be acknowledged that it was the council, and no one else, who set a budget of $7.7 million for infrastructure charges. The global economic crisis hit in 2008. Surely adjustments in expected numbers could have been made by the council for the 09/10 period before this figure was released if they thought it would not be accurate? Otherwise why shouldn’t the Chronicle question why only a paltry $300,000 has been secured? Is the council working hard enough to encourage development? Surely this is a legitmate question. The council is kidding itself if it thinks otherwise.
Aside from the development stories, other council related stories have also grabbed my attention. One was the car park at Xavier that was locked before school started, causing traffic chaos. The council apparently didn’t see that coming when they made the decision to close the car park. A little bit of foresight is apparently too much to ask from this council.
Outrage,
I love your analogy to the old story, how does it go? I’ll huff and I’ll puff and I’ll bow your house down, or some thing
like that. I’d agree the Independent is the puff and the Chronicle is the huff and blow, between them both our houes
might tumble.
Oh for an seaching, investigative paper, but then in this region it would not sell. In fairness to both Peter and Nancy
they catered to the local taste.
Sadman
I was simply wondering how to get the Council version of events, as well as accurate stories about all the good things we do out into the public eye. It is very difficult to do via the Chronicle but hey I’m really not suggesting other than the Independent as a good source of accurate info. Yes it does use press releases etc but it also now carries stories written by journalists. I for one like some good news to balance the bad. Please don’t forget you can all register for Council enews also via the homepage..
Councillor Brooks,
You want more good news published in our local paper, but like it or not, most readers want a balance of both the “good news” and whatever else is happening in our region and in our Council, good and not so good. If we want just good news re Council, we have its own website , no adverse comment or contentious reports unless it is forced to issue a media release
when stirred up by such as the Chronicle’s most recent item re a development “black hole”.
Whether you like it or not, this article, and others like it have led to wide public discussion, unscheduled Council media releases, and a better public understanding of the issues. This is a positive result, even though Council abhors the publicity.
Councillors are quite happy to use the “Chronicle” when it suits them. Take the recent opportunity Councillors were given to rate their own Council performance. All gave themselves exceptionally high marks. What really worries me is that Councillors probably believe their own score is warranted. The true mark will become obvious when next the ratepayers have their say at the next election. A lot of fresh blood would help the Fraser Coast .
Getting back to the so called “black hole”, I agree with you that the current conditions relating to development applications are fair to all concerned. The Chronicle is obviously pushing the developers barrow, assisted from the sidelines I’m sure, by some of your fellow Councillors. In a recent post I made to your Blog, I referred to the financial assistance some such Councillors accepted from development related sources. The following link from Council’s own website will clarify my concerns.
http://www.frasercoast.qld.gov.au/council/documents/Registers%20of%20Interests%20for%20Councillors%20Gifts%20Hospitality%20and%20Memberships.pdf
Maybe it’s payback time!
Congratulations to you personally for being the sole Councillor willing to comment on matters which are of some concern to some ratepayers. Your fellow Councillors seem to prefer to bunker down and hope that all the adverse comment will blow away. It’s good that at least one of you has the guts to stand up and have something to say on contentious matters. Be careful though, some are wondering whether you have a portfolio other than the environment, that of apologist for and defender of questionable Council actions/inactions. The public would dearly like to hear from some of your other associates.
Keep up your communication, it’s appreciated, but please try to be less obviously biased towards all that Council does.
Fraserwatch thank you for your comments. I do get right of reply being the boss of this blog and can see the logic in your reasoning. I disagree however with your comment that Council abhors the publicity. What I abhor is the inaccurate reporting, sensationalism and downright untruths that pretends to be ‘reporting’. I will defend Council time and time again from this type of sensationalist cr*p! I don’t believe the debate has been healthy or productive in fact I feel it has been counter productive and destructive for the community.
But you make a good point about being defensive. I prefer the motto that the best defense is to attack but attacking is not easy and I’m not naturally mean and nasty etc… But I do have an opinion obviously and enjoy a good debate so please keep the comments flowing.
PS I believe donations should be banned but if they were banned I reckon they would just go underground anyway.. It is a concern to me when the development industry is about the only major donator of funds to politicians. I agree with you that if someone gives me something ‘for free’ my attitude to them would be different than if I had never received anything. I simplify my life by not accepting donations but then again, I don’t attract many offers!
“…comments posted here that suggest the councillors intend to pick up their toys and go and play with the Indy.”
I must admit that this is how I interperated Sue’s post as well.
I only speak for myself but thought out loud that The Independent is the only alternative if APN papers keep targetting Council unfairly because I continue to believe that the negative press was designed to provide an outcome beneficial to developers at the expense of the wider community. The Chronicle is simply using its power to influence elected members for an outcome that it wants.
I believe the media should be informing the community accurately and fairly representing both sides to any issue. If it doesn’t represent both sides then, in my book, it is showing bias and fails in its duty to inform. Oh but I almost forgot that the newspapers these days are not there to provide us with news and comment and entertain and inform us they are there to profit. At what cost I wonder? But yes I read the Independent. It is free, widely circulated and advertising in that paper usually is better received than advertising in the Chronicle.
As an aside it seems that the Council from where the new Chronicle Editor, Mr Peter Chapman hails from, decided to simply stop responding to anything asked of them by their local newspaper as they suffered a similar treatment. What a sad day when a Council loses confidence in its local paper. Especially one with a long and esteemed tradition as our Chronicle. Another two people I know, one who which has subscribed to the paper for many, many years, tell me they have cancelled their sub.
Sue,
You must remember there are two sorts of people in our world; those that think and those that think threw their hip pocket.
Then we have the fear factor; people so deep in debt that they cannot make any decision if it effects their budget.
Then we have the developement industry and it is well aware of all of the above and plays on peoples weaknesses.
Free thinking and democracy died many yeas ago.
Sadman
How is the Chronicle targetting the council when members of the public are approaching the Chronicle with legitmate concerns?
In response to Outraged (17/2/10), I would ask two questions; were the concerns legiimate?
Also had the people concerned put the same questions to council?
It would seem to me, when looked into, most of those “concerns” indicate a lack of understanding
on the part of those concerned.
Sadman