Over the years several councillors have started their own blogsites, or newsletters. We’ve had Kate Ashmor’s brief foray into publication, Lipshutz’s and Pilling’s aborted efforts, and of course, the notorious Nick Staikos leaflet – courtesy of council funds. All have fallen by the wayside. Pilling has not written a word since September, whilst Lipshutz’s apologia atrophied in August 2009. Ashmor managed only one email newletter, and Staikos (and council) back peddled mighty quick after questions were asked about who paid for what, and why.

We can dismiss Lipshutz’s brief career in blogging simply because it started out, and remained a continual front for the administration. When critical comments began to appear, he packed it in, rather than answer some of these comments. Can the same be said for Pilling? At least here was a councillor who appeared to speak with an independent voice. He raised issues (ie comments on public questions, Carnegie pool, GESAC) and made his views public. Then, magically this all stopped. Why we ask? What pressures have possibly been brought to bear to silence all of these councillors over the years? Surely each individual is entitled to voice an opinion – provided it is their opinion and they are not speaking on behalf of council? Plenty of other municipalities have councillors with blogsites and newsletters. They do not appear to fear any consequences for speaking their minds. It’s only Glen Eira that functions best when there is a wall of silence that separates councillors from their communities – and of course a group of councillors who can be bluffed, convinced, or pressured into acquiescence.