Monday, November 28, 2011

POMAS SAINT CLAIR!



A group of bowlers enjoy the surrounds of St Clair Recreation Reserve.
These practitioners of the Serbian form of lawn bowls should not be supported,  one local real estate agent told a Council workshop  last year, as they “do not add value to the area.” 

In the background can be seen the inaugural meeting of the Community Alliance. The gathering was addressed by Nick Xenophon and Mark Parnell, as well as many of the Alliances’  member groups.

Speeches as follows:

Nick Xenophon :

"It's great to be here! Can I just say that I've had a lot to do with many of 
these groups over time, and St Clair is just one  example, where governments have got it wrong. Where polititions haven't listened to the people, and we've seen a situtation where it's been taken up as housing when in fact it should have been left as housing, or at the very least  some high density housing on the edges of it - let it be a world class stormwater 
recycling wetland and yet they've done the wrong thing. We've seen it happen at Mt Barker, where they don't have the resources, or the fundamental community infrastructure for the many thousands of homes that we've put there. There's something seriously wrong there - something wrong about building more and more houses on prime agricultural land past Gawler, down McLaren Vale. That's why it's terrific that we have 
Carol Vincent, the President of the South Australia Farmer's Federation,  -they're not part of the N F F I should say, which seems to just sit on the fence but the South Australian Farmers Federation doesn’t, because they know the importance of food security and keeping up prime agricultural land.

So I want to talk about one of the problems we've got here. One of the key issues we need to deal with is this: right now it seems that too many developers have too much power when it comes to key  decisions where communities are being run rough shod over. (cheers, applause)  
And what we need to do - and that's why the importance of this group is that it's easy   politicians to ignore one or two groups - but when you have as many groups as this, when you have groups as diverse as the Adelaide Parklands Preservation Association, the Adelaide Showgrounds Area Residents Group, the Australian Civics Trust, the Burnside Save Open Spaces, the Cheltenham Park Residents association,  the Gawler Region Community Forum, the Mt Barker & District Residents Association  the North Adelaide Society, the Norward Residents Association, the  Peoples Enviromental Protection Alliance, the Prospect Residents Association, the River Lakes Action Group - and by the way, that report's coming out tomorrow the interim report on the draft plan - the South Australia Residents and Taxpayers, the St Clair Residents Association.  

Well, good luck to any politician, any government ignoring all those groups together because if you speak with one voice they can't pick you off.  That's why it's good that Mark Parnell from the Australian Greens is here. In my time in state parliament I worked well with Mark - although now I'm working well with his wife Penny Ryde in the senate - I can't seem to get away from the Parnell clan. Mark and I share  very similar views in relation to  this. 

We need to reform political donation laws in this state I don't want us to have the best democracy that money can buy, and that's why in South Australia,  we need urgently to have political disclosure laws that are the best in the world, that are  completely transparent, and we also need to have public funding of election campaigns on condition that  you can't take big donations from the big end of town. (applause) 

And that's why  I'd be happy to work with both Mark Parnell, with John  Darley my 
fellow independent in the Legislative Council, to bring about some changes to political donation laws, not just at a national level, but at a state level, because right now it is shameful the way that political donations in this state work.

This organisation is critical. It's important - this is about participatory democracy, and don't ever think that you're too small to make a difference. What this group is also about is leadership. I think one of the best definitions of leadership was given by Ralph Nader, the great consumer advocate who said; "The function of genuine leadership is to 
produce more leaders, not more followers" What I see today is a lot of  genuine leaders, and leaders of the future when it comes to bringing about change. This might seem a tough fight, but you need to win this for communities right across the state, right across the metropolitan area 

There is something quite bizarre that   we are spreading  more and more, taking up open spaces, taking up prime agricultural land when the square mile of the city of Adelaide right now has 21.000 residents. Eighty years ago, before high rise it had 46.000 residents   How did we  lose 25,000 people from the center of our city?  That just shows you what an  abject failure our planning laws have been in this state (applause)

That's why we need to reform them, and that's why this Alliance is so important. I just want to leave you with one final; thought - this comes from the words of  Anita Roddick, the late great founder of  the Body Shop who said, if you think you're too small to make a difference, try going to bed with a mosquito in your room. I have great pleasure in 
launching this Alliance. (cheers, applause)

---------------------------------------------------
Mark Parnell 

"Thanks very much for coming along, meeting here on Kaurna land. I'm delighted that many of the people here have been my clients for the last fifteen years when I was a lawyer at the Enviromental  Defenders Office - many of these groups came to us for legal advice. 

Now  I'm in the State Parliament looking after a lot of these issues - in fact someone said to me before - one of the Mt Barker people: "Mark, how's that court case going? Those documents you're trying to get under freedom of  information?"  Well, I can tell you, coming up to the first birthday of the court case...still no documents in sight; but we're going to keep pushing, because, as Nick Xenophon said, the connection between big property developers and government through donation and other influence is an 
absolutely toxic situation, it's a corruption of our democracy. I endorse what Nick said - we need to clean it up. 

A good spot for you to start - go to the Greens' website: "DEMOCRACY FOR SALE" and have a look at it. We've documented a lot of these episodes in New South Wales, and 
there's a South Australian  page as well.

The groups that are here - Nick mentioned some of them, tried to go through a roll call - I won't do the same thing,  but what I think you all know, is there's some groups not here as well. There's some groups who would love to come under your banner. I know for example there's some people fighting a dam  in Brownhill Creek, trying to stop masses of 
concrete going in to an open space and spoiling  that area; I was a week or so ago  in Moonta  a boat harbour that's going to destroy their beaches and lead to erosion. A couple of weeks ago I went to Kangaroo Island - the 31st birthday celebration of KI Eco Action - now that's a group not everyone's heard of - they had  the guts 15 years ago, to take their local council to court, and they prosecuted their local council for breaching native vegetation laws. The council used to take a bulldozer to roadside vegetation - against the law - the local group took them to court and they won in the Magistrate's Court. 

Small groups of people can actually achieve great things. There's also some aboriginal groups we don't want to lose track of as well, who are fighting against uranium mines and 
inappropriate development in their traditional lands. 

The influence of developers is one thing, but our development laws   are something else. The way I see that the  whole sector moves, that there's a job for everyone - a job for the organisers, the people who can organise; there's jobs for the artists, song writers and poets. We've heard some songs this morning. There's jobs for everyone. In that toolkit  for action, one of the things we can do in state parliament, is we can try and change the laws, and we can shine a bit of a spotlight on  things that go wrong. I was very pleased - I can see some Port Adelaide friends up the back there - very pleased that the Parliament has voted to support a committee into the development at Port Adelaide. Newport Keys was a 
shocker - you told them that ten years ago, that it was going to be a shocker. It was a shocker. It's fallen over. Now's the opportunity to get something better we're going to get  chances in parliament for witnesses to come along and talk about a better vision for development - a development that doesn't just hand it to the big end of town but makes 
sure there's places for kids to play, that there;s open space and some biodiversity in the suburbs. 

I'm going to keep doing what I've been doing I guess for the last 15 years, but with different tools in the tool kit. We're going to be fighting in parliament for fairer laws. We're going to try and make sure that the categorisatrion of development  means that you people don't get left out. You know this - they categorise things as 1 and 2 - you don't even get told until the bulldozers turn up. We need a lot more  forms of development where you have the right   to go to the umpire - to go to the environment court and overturn lousy decisions, and that right has been taken away from you year after year. We need to fight to get those rights back. 

So, good on you - reach your tentacles out further - there's many more groups who  would love the support and the camaraderie that you can offer them. All the best for the coalition and I look forward in a year or two to not being able to move here because so many people will have come on board - it's a fantastic initiative - good on you and lets keep going.




Friday, November 25, 2011

OMBUDSMANS LETTER



A COPY OF THE Ombudsman’s letter to the Mayor, Charles Sturt Council as presented in the Agenda for the Monday 28th November meeting. The Council staff have blanked out a section of the letter which presumably names the wards which councilors  “P”, “B” and “M” represent.

Remarkably enough, councilors  P, B and M have chosen not to reveal their identities to their electors. It is reasonable to assume that their reasons for wishing to remain anonymous are based on a belief that they have not breached the Council’s code of Conduct provisions. However it must be the case that, if open government is a consideration, then their identities will be revealed once the Council has ruled on their cases, innocent or otherwise..

A consequence of Councilors not putting their hands up is shown by the unfortunate linking of Councilor “P” and a the former Deputy Mayor Angela Keneally. This occurred during Cr Randall’s speech to Charles Sturt Council at last weeks’ Special Meeting. The lumping together was unintentional, and the Cr retracted any imputation, but it is obvious that the reluctance of  the Councilors referred to in the letter to own up to their identities in the Ombudsman’s Report leaves all Councilors open to guilt by association in this regrettable fashion.

Monday, November 21, 2011

A TALE OF TWO TODS

A report  on the agenda of Charles Sturt Council’s  Finance, Policy and  Delegations Committee meeting tonight estimates that the  costs of the ground breaking new development in Bowden   on  the council budget would amount to  approximately $800,000 .

The report proposes that these costs ought to be “ring fenced” from the town as a whole, either by way of a ‘differential rate’ or a sinking fund financed by the developers.

Co-incidentally, the Minister is due to release the  Bowden Village Development Plan Amendment on the Tuesday following the Council’s meeting.

The Council report admits that previous major developments, such as the St Clair  TOD, have not been  ‘ring fenced’ in this way by council.

By C D

Saturday, November 19, 2011

Suspension of the Charles Sturt Council?

RESIGNATION OF CR KENEALLY AS DEPUTY MAYOR.

Last Thursday night’s special Council meeting, which saw the Deputy Mayor submit her resignation from the position, indicates that the Council is experiencing difficulty facing up to the tasks set it by the Ombudsmans Final Report.
The report was publicly released earlier this month, but a draft had been circulated to affected Council members earlier in the year.

Councillor Keneally in her resignation speech to the meeting, indicated that she felt unable to carry out her duties in the position of Deputy Mayor. She made a  passionate declaration that she would continue as ward councillor:

" I'd like to take the opportunity to thank the community for their very warm welcome, support and encouragement during the period I have been involved in the Deputy Mayors' role, and I'd also note the value that they place, and the  respect that they have for the role of deputy mayor.  In the role of  elected member however, I look forward to the remainder of  the term of council.  I continue to focus on the core business of council, as well as look for as many opportunities to be accessible and available to the residents as I always have been. My passion has been, and continues to be "Keep rates low" and to ensure that  residents throughout the City of Charles Sturt are supported and well represented. Thank you, and I ask that this   be included in the minutes"

She told HI that her difficulties were more general than merely the arguments concerning the street corner meeting “Turf Wars” which had attracted high profile media coverage recently. Several councilors agreed during the special meeting that this was the case.
(The question of the  street corner meetings organised by the local state member were examined in depth in the Ombudsmans Report)

Tensions boiled over during the debate on Councillor Agius’ motion which called for the Council to develop a policy on  “Street Corner Meetings” to include protocols and guidelines, and be adopted by the Finance Policy and Delegations Committee.

Councilor Randall opposed the motion, stating that Council needed to respond to the Ombudsman’s Report in a serious fashion, and that this would have to include questions of councilors participation in street corner meetings. He singled out Cr Keneally, who he claimed was not a team player on council:
“my suspicion is, Councillor Keneally, that you are seeking preselection for the Australian Labor Party as a candidate.”
He said that in his opinion, she would make a good parliamentary member, and he wished her every success, but that in this Cr Keneally  had received some very bad political advice.

Cr Randall quoted from page 63 of the Ombudsman’s Report, which section examines the testimony of Councilor “P” regarding street corner meetings and the involvement of the Hon. Michael Atkinson’s electorate office in organising these meetings.

Cr Randall stated:
“The Ombudsmans Report says where we should go.  If you're going to be a candidate, and you start to use member of parliaments’ offices you need to be very careful.
We shouldn't be doing it because it will get us involved in another inquiry.
It's not the way to go”

His peroration was interrupted by a series of points of order regarding relevance and probity, which for the most part were  upheld by the Mayor, who repeatedly warned the Councilor

Cr Keneally demanded that the Cr Randall withdraw imputations of  improper motive,

Cr Randall stated that he had not wished to make any such implication.
A division was called which showed Cr Randall  to be the sole opponent of the motion.

COMMENT
I attended this ‘Special’ meeting of the Council with the expectation that I might discover how well the Council had taken on board the Ombusmans Report. The conclusions I formed do not incline me to the view that the situation is in hand.

It was “business as usual” at town hall.

While it is true that feelings were heated, there can be no excuse for the disrespect shown for the Mayors’ role in chairing the meeting. At one point her activity  in  assisting a fellow councilor was challenged – a remarkable initiative for a councilor to make  given that the Mayor has the responsibility for considering the Ombudsman’s recommendation in relation to code of conduct violations against these same councilors.

If the council is dysfunctional, as Cr Keneallys’ resignation seems to suggest, then the Government will have no option other than to suspend it.

 By D

Tuesday, November 15, 2011

OMBUDSMAN'S FINAL REPORT

Submission to HI for publication 14th November 2011


The SA Ombudsman's "Investigation into the City of Charles Sturt - Final Report - November 2011" pays close attention to those issues of concern to all of us interested in local government affairs and the St Clair land swap imbroglio. The report can be accessed here:


It contains numerous quotations from the 118 hours of evidence taken from 28 witnesses, who included 16 councilors from the time in question, as well as the Council CEO and (especially interestingly) the local MP. 

Hopefully the evidence garnered by the investigation will one day be made public, because it will almost certainly provide historians of the future with a valuable resource.

If I had any quibbles to make with the Ombudsman's work, I would point to the sketchiness of the investigation of the relationship between the various development companies operating in the site, and the Charles Sturt Council. However, while Mr. Bingham has seen fit to examine background material from the ALP sub-branch regarding actions of Council and Councilors, for whatever reason no such evidence has been obtained from the developers of the site. 

I find it interesting to note in this respect that the three members of the Council's Development Assessment Panel declared a so called "conflict of interest"  by reason of their DAP membership at the formal vote on the land swap proposal taken in full council on the 28th April 2008. This was one month after the purchase of the Sheridan site by the Cheltenham race course developer, Woodvile JV. 

Prior to this date the development applications considered by the Charles Sturt DAP for the Sheridan site, had been for remediation and minor works and had been submitted by the previous owner, Stockdale. I find it impossible to conceive what conflict of interest the three Council members actually had – whatever was in their minds, they appear to have received no advice to the contrary from the Council CEO at the meeting and excused themselves one by one when a division on the land swap motion was called.

By resident "D"

Tuesday, November 8, 2011

TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT - NO LAUGHING MATTER

Todays ABC radio 891 discussion  concerning the proposed re-opening of Barton Road North Adelaide  gave the participants plenty to laugh over; but not so much mirth for people who are concerned with traffic management in Bowden Brompton, where a development plan for the Governments Bowden Urban Village is about to be announced.

Whatever ones’ views on the merits of the Government redevelopment of Bowden South, it is accepted by all that it will generate increased vehicle traffic in the area, on roads that are already expected to carry more traffic than their safe capacity, redevelopment aside..

So to hear  Michael Atkinson promote his  introduction of a private members bill into state parliament aimed at increasing traffic on Hawker Street has a sobering effect.
Quote: MA: "This is principally for people coming up Hawker Street, exercising their traditional right  which they had under Colonel Light’s  original plan for Adelaide until 1987 ..”[loud laughter ]”
(the full transcript can be accessed here


 Mr Atkinson justifies his Barton Road   campaign (apparently) on principles of 18th century common law regarding traditional rights of way. No mention of the considerable improvement to the 18th century laws developed right here in South Australia  in the ‘Torrens Title’. But even more sobering is the lack of reference to a traffic management study proposed by the Charles Sturt Council., let alone any of the implications of the Bowden Urban Village development more generally. For example, it might be feasible, as the Hassell masterplan originally proposed, to have the tram extended northwards along Chief Street, with the possibility of restoring the original tram way up to North Adelaide, thereby reducing the need for private vehicle trips in the development area, as is Mr Atkinson’s own party policy.
Proposed Chief Street tram extension - artists impression
                                       

Blog Archive

Echo