This is the personal blog of Ian Ker, who was Councillor for the South Ward of the Town of Vincent from 1995 to 2009. I have been a resident of this area since 1985. This blog was originally conceived as a way of letting residents of Vincent know what I have been doing and sharing thoughts on important issues. I can now use it to sound off about things that concern me.

If you want to contact me, my e-mail is still ian_ker@hotmail.com or post a comment on this blog.

To post a comment on this blog, select the individual post on which you wish to comment, by clicking on the title in the post or in the list to the left of the blog, and scroll down to the 'Post a Comment' box at the foot.

Search This Blog

Sunday, August 25, 2013

And Again! Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose

In the 9th November 1993 debate on the City of Perth Restructuring Bill, the process leading to the 'autocratic announcement being made by the Government' was described thus (Hansard, 9th November 1993):

"…nothing was contained in the policies and programs of the Government when in Opposition to indicate that it had a proposal of this kind in prospect."

"…no consultation occurred at all with the elected members. Not only did the ratepayers of Western Australia not know a thing about this, but also the PCC councillors had to find out by the small number of leaks that occurred."

"Despite a clear, unanimous proposition put to the Minister that there must be a referendum on this question, he simply sat there … and repeated the lines that the decision had been made and the Government would not change it."

"In the context of no election policy relating to this question - in fact, some policies that directly contradict it - no consultation with the elected representatives is the height of arrogance. It is a totally undemocratic stance to say to the electors and ratepayers, "I'm sorry. We're not going to consult you. Your views don't matter."

Now, it is true that these statements were made by Dr Carmen Lawrence who, as Leader of the Opposition, had good reason to portray the Government in a bad light, but no Government member interjected, corrected or contradicted any of these statements - despite frequent such responses in other parts of the debate.

If this all sounds horribly familiar, it's probably because it's all happening again - but this time Barnett wants to reverse part of the decision he so fervently supported back then. Funny, though, I don't recall his admitting to having made a mistake back in 1993.

No comments:

Post a Comment