Once again there has been a very limited consultation process for an important strategic policy. The accompanying two and a half page officer’s report on the consultation is incredibly bereft of detail and once more entirely misleading. The first two pages in fact merely repeat the previous motions, and we get a full page regurgitation of the advertising strategy. The actual results from the ‘consultation’ take up less than half a page and include such generalities as:
“The main message of the consultation process was that it is a step in the right direction but that more could or should be done.”
We are also informed that there were 531 ‘visits’ to the Have your Say link on council’s website. Do not be deceived – this is NOT to the ‘Have Your Say’ online forum, but merely to another webpage where users could fill out a form or email council with their thoughts.
Interestingly, we are told that there were 35 submissions, but only groups are mentioned.
Comments on Officers’ Summary
Our major criticisms relate to appendix 1 – the summary authored by officers of these 35 submissions. Readers should carefully note the following:
- There is no consistent indication as to the respective authors of the various submissions. That is, we are not told whether each point is to be accredited to Resident 1, Resident 2, or Resident 3. Hence there is no way of knowing whether all comments from the 35 submissions have in actual fact been included in this ‘summary’. Council can of course, put our
minds at rest by publishing the full submissions – as most other councils do!!!! - Of the 93 individual comments included, 52 resulted in ‘No Change’ classifications, whilst 16 resulted in the comment ‘Note’. This latter ‘action’ was usually in response to complimentary comments! Hence of the remaining 26 points 13 resulted in decisions to ‘advocate’, whilst others included such gems as providing a definition for ‘sustainable’. Note that the entire strategy has been labelled ‘sustainable’!!!!!!!
- Also worthy of mention is the decision not to change anything since the recommendations ‘fall under the ‘Prepare a Walking Strategy Action’. Surely walking must be an integral part of any ‘sustainable transport’ plan?
Our conclusions are obvious. Consultation at Glen Eira remains inadequate in both process and outcome, whilst reporting procedures lack transparency and comprehensiveness. Residents opinions are once again given short shrift and basically ignored!
Glen Eira Debates 
June 27, 2011 at 5:40 PM
Wow thank you for your comprehensive reading of the Transport Strategy. It is a worry once again that Glen Eira is not able to widely consult with their residents. This is one more consultation on a Major Project that they do not know how to get the message out. I would suggest GEC look at how Mornington Peninsula Shire Council conducts their communications with residents. Their Council Newspaper is just one example of excellent communication and advising of results of interacting with residents. Their Council area is huge and they are seen to get things done.
June 27, 2011 at 6:38 PM
Resident, they don’t want to get the “message out”. Secrecy does not go too well with plenty of submissions, discussions, forums, working parties, and publishing of results. The more secrecy there is the more residents are entitled to believe that there’s plenty to hide. It would also be really embarrasing to read people’s submissions where they slammed this incompetent council. Instead the comments are massaged by overpaid pen pushers whose job is to keep a lid on everything and only go through the pretense of having wide ranging consultation.
June 27, 2011 at 10:12 PM
This makes it twice in a row where submissions have not been published. Just a couple of weeks ago there was the “Engagement Strategy” submissions that somehow were presented to a minority of councillors on the consultation committee and that’s it. I can’t believe that this is the way to run an open and transparent council. Hence it’s up to you councillors. What are you going to do about this to ensure that all submissions on all policies and strategies are published and freely available?
June 28, 2011 at 12:29 AM
After witnessing the “chosen Four Councillors” sit at the C60 meeting on 4April where about ninety-five percent of speakers told this minority of councillors that they should make changes and the “specialists’ JUST RUBBER STAMPED THE C60 PLAN IN SUCH AN AUTOMATIC WAY it would seem that we are all bashing our heads against the racecourse brickwall.
Once, Peter Lalor and others took more drastic action and I’m sure the time is almost here again. GLEN EIRA COUNCIL ONLY ASKS FOR CONSULTATION TO FILL IN A LITTLE TIME(to appear to be listening|) and pacify easily satisfied ratepayers. I am far from one of them ….. the council staff and some of the councillors are not in those jobs for the benefit of all ratepayers!!!!!!!