USE EXTRA TIME BEFORE COUNCIL ELECTIONS TO CONSIDER VOTE
Participatory democracy depends on us.
The Wagga community has the opportunity to vote at least four new councillors to represent us for the next four years.
We also have an extra three months to assess what qualities our candidates have that can lead us into a future. Are they engaged? Are they visible? Are they transparent? Are they adaptable? With this extra time I would like to ask people in our electorate are we getting the most out of the current councillors? Can they lead us into the future or is it time for them to graciously step aside and mentor new candidates.
Do they currently fulfil the requirements of the role? How engaged are they really?
As stated on the council website "Many councillors spend 10-15 hours each week on council activities, depending on the size of the council and the issues that arise".
"Councillors are expected to attend all council and some committee meetings and a range of workshops and community engagement activities."
The Community Strategic Plan guides us all in how to achieve these stated goals and how we can measure if we are on track or not. Shouldn't we be deciding who has the skills, vision and energy to lead us towards our goals. It is our vote that will decide the team that will lead us into the future.
How do we know who we are voting for?
Let's face it "why are you running for council?" as a question cannot provide us with the detail and transparency required to help community make good decisions.
A candidate and councillor survey consisting of 20 questions asked by random concerned community members is currently being circulated to candidates.
All existing councillors have already received theirs. Hopefully a survey by the people will give us more information to help us make better decisions. I look forward to sharing and comparing the responses.
Participatory democracy depends on us asking the questions and candidates willingly providing us with answers. Who will show up? Who won't? That's our first clue.
Leanne Schulz, Brucedale
NO 'DOUBLE ENTRIES' IN CARBON EMISSIONS DEBATE
Robert T Walker ("Pointing out faulty logic", July 23) claims that Graham Parton has faulty logic and uses a double entry trick for carbon emissions. Parton's letter states clearly that the emissions from exported coal are NOT counted as Australian emissions. He also points out that per capita we have high emissions as we are a small, high fossil-fuel consuming country.
While North America and Canada have had severe wildfires, Europe and China extreme flooding Walker is happy in his climate change denial.
However, it is disingenuous of Walker to accuse Parton of wobbly bookkeeping when Parton had clearly stated his case.
Sarah Pollard Williams, Brucedale
READ MORE LETTERS:
SELFISH ACTIONS OF PROTESTERS COULD POSE THREAT TO REGIONS
I think on Saturday we all saw the protesters and felt it. If a 'ring of steel' isn't put in place between country and city, and soon, it won't be long before we are seeing deaths from COVID in the regions.
Greg Adamson, Griffith
HAVE YOUR SAY: Do you have something to get off your chest? Simply click here to send a letter to the editor.