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

Friday, August 8, 2014

Pre-Empting Process?

Hot on the heels of his non-response to questions about local government amalgamations (http://ianrker-vincent.blogspot.com.au/2014/08/lunch-with-ned-flanders-still-no-answers.html), Mike Nahan, in an incredible email to his electors, says that the outcome for the City of Canning has already been determined. 

What an incredible statement: "While I am well aware that the majority of local residents would like Canning to remain as it is, that option is no longer available."

This appears to mean that he has inside knowledge that the Local Government Advisory Board, despite its still supposedly being in the process of assessing proposals and submissions (including submissions to the currently-advertised 'intended recommendations'), has already determined the outcome - with the only variable being whether certain parts of Canning go to Gosnells or Melville.

Alternatively, he is actively trying to influence the people of Canning not to express their real preference to the LGAB.

It is still open to the people of Canning to restate their strong and irrevocable wish not to become part of either Melville or Gosnells - the LGAB 'intended recommendation' provides an added opportunity for them to do so. It is perfectly possible to say 'we want to stay as Canning' while still saying which of the Melville or Gosnells options is the less repugnant to you.

 It is also open to you to use the submission process to object to the way the proposal artificially evades the Dadour poll provision - see also the earlier post on this blog (http://ianrker-vincent.blogspot.com.au/2014/08/walga-told-to-represent-its-members.html)
Click to enlarge
Posted by at

4 comments:

  1. AnonymousAugust 8, 2014 at 12:29 PM

    Well said Ian. We only hope that the ratepayers/residents come out in force on this matter.

    ReplyDelete
  2. AnonymousAugust 8, 2014 at 7:16 PM

    City of Canning has launched Fight for Canning #2
    Public meetings to show support for retaining Canning as is (except for the small piece of Leeming) on Sunday 10th August at 3pm and Monday 11th August at 6pm
    at the City of Canning Administration Centre, 1317 Albany Highway, Cannington.

    ReplyDelete
  3. MargaretAugust 9, 2014 at 11:42 AM

    After the newspaper advertisement I contacted the L.G.A.B. and asked if the fate of the City of Canning had been sealed and I was been told that no decision has been made. I have indicated this to Dr Nahan - no response of course except he emailed all his electorate with the same incorrect or untruthful statement. As I did not get a timely response I choose to contact the Premier and ask him if this is the correct behaviour of a Minister of our wonderful state? I WILL BE THERE ON SUNDYA AND MONDAY - Bring it on!!! Margaret

    ReplyDelete
  4. AnonymousAugust 11, 2014 at 11:39 PM

    The Minister has released his draft response to the LGAB on Proposal 10 and a media release on his website. Quote: "The City of Canning's campaign is an attempt to shut down democratic choice, not enhance it," said Dr Nahan. What democratic choice??

    ReplyDelete

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)