Update 17 November 2008: 0h the irony. Today the Age ran a story about the declining quality of local government councillor candidates and their propensity to corruption. All the more reason to vote for socialists. In another article the Age suggests that there will be significant turnover in local governments as disenchanted voters kick many of the lazy corrupt councillors to the gutter where they belong. Bring it on!

You don’t have to be a socialist or have sympathy for the wider ideological platform of the Socialist Party to consider voting for Steve Jolly (Langridge Ward) and his colleagues Denise Dudley (Melba Ward) and Anthony Main (Nicholls Ward) in the elections for the City of Yarra council. The have a broad platform of pragmatic policies specifically focused on Yarra issues.

The Socialist Party candidates have been by far the most transparent and honest candidates during the election campaign. Fitzroy residents know exactly what they stand for and what they plan to do if elected. They also have no agenda to personally benefit from the policies they propose. I honestly cannot say this of most other candidates.

To give one example, the Leader and MCV report that the owner of Collingwood’s Peel Hotel, Tom McFeely, is standing for election in the Langridge Ward. As a publican, he wants to outlaw public drinking and reduce the opening hours of local bottle shops. These policies could drive more people into pubs to obtain alcohol. Conflict of interest? What conflict of interest?

What a joke. It is no wonder most people are disgusted by or indifferent to local government elections. Most candidates only run because they want to use a position on council to improve the business environment for their particular industry. It is so open and so blatant you can’t call it corruption because corruption requires sneaking around covertly breaking rules. What is the term for lawful but unethical behaviour?

Oh yes, it’s called politics. That also describes all the ALP and Liberal clones running – they are not interested in best serving the local community. They are merely getting some practice in screwing people so they have something to put on their CVs when they contest pre-selections for state or federal government seats.

You may call this cynicism; I call it realism. I hate politics.

City of Yarra elections – honesty and accountability

6 thoughts on “City of Yarra elections – honesty and accountability

  • 28 November 2008 at 8:34 am
    Permalink

    Well, its obvious who you vote for!

    I have been the only candidate to actually SPELL out my ideas and policies in detail on a flyer. I have not tried to be vague and tell people what they want to hear.
    As for my public drinking policy. How naive are you. Do you think I am standing for council to boost my business? I want public drinking banned as it upsets residents; publicans; and the police. Maybe I’m a fool. But can you or anyone tell me why we should SUPPORT public drinking?

    What you forgert is that I am standing for what I believe in. I don’t have a particular political or party politics agenda influencing my thoughts. All I want is for councilors to do their job and not focus on their egos or their partys idealogy. I would happily withdraw from the election if I thought my action would help bring stability and common sense to the council in which I pay a lot of rates. Can any other candidate honestly say that they focus on local issues?

    i’m happy to discuss any issues with you, whatever your name is.

    tom mcfeely

    Reply
  • 28 November 2008 at 10:00 am
    Permalink

    In response to your claims:
    WRONG – you are NOT the only candidate to spell out your policies on a flyer. I have flyers sitting on my desk from Labor, the Greens and the Socialist Party.
    LOGICAL FLAW – I am not in favour of public drinking and did not say I was. You have made a false assumption based on a basic flaw in logical reasoning.
    UNSUITABLE – I was commenting on the potential for conflicts of interest based on a comparison of your business interests and your policy ideas. If you are incapable of seeing this or don’t understand why conflicts of interest are an accountability problem, you ared not suited to public office.
    FIGHT CLUB – Many candidates have made various committments to local issues. You are not unique. You are not special.

    Reply
  • 2 December 2008 at 7:24 pm
    Permalink

    Why should drinking be restricted to licensed premises? Why can’t I share a bottle of wine in a park at a picnic? The only reason I can see is for the benefit of the venues holding the licenses. Tom can dress it up how ever he wants but his policies were largely alcohol-centric and were a conflict of interest.

    And what was he trying to do making it harder for cyclists because it’s inconvenient for car drivers – get with the 21st century Tom…driving a car is bad!

    Anyway the election results tell Tom what the residents of Langridge think of his policies. They’re not the right fit!

    Tom should put energy into trying to repair the wedge he drove between gay males and the rest of society through his elitist door polices. Thanks for that Tom. You do not represent me as a gay male and you do not represent me as a resident of Langridge.

    Yours sincerely
    Darren
    “I’m Gay, I Cycle and I Vote”

    Reply
  • 2 December 2008 at 9:53 pm
    Permalink

    Thanks for your comment!

    Tom’s pub is one with the straight ban isn’t it? As a straight man, albeit one that hates macho thugs, I can understand this. But I thought he also banned lesbians. Actually, I’ve never understood the political divide that sometimes emerges between gay men and lesbians.

    Anyway, he definitely does not understand the local community on other issues, such as transport. The Socialists and the Greens will hopefully hold the ALP to account.

    Reply
  • 17 December 2008 at 1:17 am
    Permalink

    hey Brian, thanks for your comment on my blog ( http://nocomply.wordpress.com/2008/11/29/tom-mcfeely-for-yarralangridge-local-council ). been occasionally reading yours for quite a while now & loving it every time i do :)

    you’re right, Tom is off with the faries on local issues (no pun intended, besides that’s about the only thing Tom & I have in common!). why’m i not surprised that yet another Boomer just doesn’t get it?

    banning public drinking ( practised by law-abiding citizens in parks for far longer than i go back) is yet another erosion of personal freedoms that some people think is reasonable in “our difficult times”, when in fact it’s simply an admission that the mechanisms in place to deal with antisocial drinking behaviour are insufficient or poorly funded. but why let the truth get in the way of rational decision-making when banning public drinking will boost business, eh?

    Reply
    • 17 December 2008 at 7:41 am
      Permalink

      Hi Anthony, thanks! This is why I was so annoyed at the council elections – too many candidates running out of selfish self interest and self importance rather than finding practical solutions to local problems. With the new Greens / ALP mutual are licking alliance nothing has improved.

      Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *