Alpine Opinion

Candidates’ final say

Posted in Alpine Shire Council by Ray Dixon on 26 November, 2008
councilelection1
Paying its usual amount of respect to the council elections, the Bright Observer has this week buried its final coverage of the campaign way back on page 50.

Over the past few weeks our one and only local paper has asked each of the 15 candidates a series of mostly inane questions – eg “Why are you running for council? - but today’s question actually required the candidates to put some thought into their responses, with some, er, mixed results. Today’s question was:

“Suggest key changes, developments or upgrades to benefit the shire”

I don’t wish to single out any candidates but you really have to wonder about some of the answers. Two candidates basically said “no comment”, while several others (including some sitting councillors) seemed to believe there was nothing much the council could do except hold the status quo. One candidate even suggested he’d be “lobbying to change” the way the council is funded – I guess he’ll be banging his head against a brick wall for the next 4 years if he gets elected.

Of course there was the usual grab-bag of motherhood and general feel-good statements, which sound good but are really nothing more than vague, non-specific, hollow and meaningless words. I did love the double cliche used by one candidate though, who said: “… we can get the ball rolling, throw our hats in the ring and have fun doing it.” Good plan!

As for my response, well, this is what I said:

Developing more industrial land in Myrtleford would help to attract new industries and employment. The upgrade of the Bright CBD under the Bright Future Project would reinvigorate the town centre and benefit tourism. The shire should also encourage the building of new retirement villages with adequate facilities to cater for our ageing population.

I just tried to answer the question and put some thought into what the Alpine council could and should be doing for the benefit of the ratepayers. As for the other candidates though … well, I suggest you get the paper and read some of the quite worrying responses for yourself.

3 comments

3 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. Lee Rosser (Bright) said, on 26 November, 2008 at 1:16 pm

    I voted backwards from 15-1 as it seemed a more appropriate way to vote.

    I’m tipping you’ll …….. (childish abuse edited out)

  2. Ray Dixon (Bright) said, on 26 November, 2008 at 1:43 pm

    A ‘reverse donkey vote’, Lee? That’s really clever of you. It also means you put Vonarx last, Leschen first and Dixon second. Thanks.

  3. Kieran Bennett (Wodonga) said, on 28 November, 2008 at 6:08 pm

    A sound policy position Ray, I hope that discerning voters will recognise someone capable of sensible economic thought.


Comments are closed.