In what can only be interpreted as a real slap in the face to community, 4 councillors last night showed exactly how hypocrisy reigns supreme in Glen Eira. For all the talk of ‘listening to the community’ and the absolute waste of public funds on ‘consultation’ year after year after year, it is the secret, behind the scenes ‘negotiations’ that matter far more than what ratepayers want. As Pilling so disingenuously stated ‘consultation is only part’ of decision making despite the fact that in September 2013 he had extolled the virtues and the binding nature of ‘consultation’ when he moved the motion to ‘restore’ the conservatory saying at the time that the motion ‘was justified by the consultation’.
The conservatory will be destroyed thanks to the votes of Lipshutz, Pilling, Esakoff and Delahunty – the latter seconding the Lipshutz motion. Hyams and Okotel were absent. Camden ward voters should note that this decision was supported by 2 out of their 3 representatives! Sounness, Magee and Lobo voted against the motion.
The hypocrisy mentioned above is made all the more apparent when we turn to our archives and highlight the sad history of the conservatory ‘debates’ over the years. Yes, individuals may alter their positions but certainly not for a paltry $200,000 and not when the community has spoken again and again about what they want done. This issue we believe is far more about integrity than money! As we’ve said, millions of dollars in budget blow-outs occur (ie Duncan MacKinnon, Booran Road Reservoir; car parks at GESAC) and no doubt will continue to occur. We therefore invite readers to peruse previous comments made by these four councillors at different times and ask themselves whether or not they are truly the voice of the people?
OCTOBER 2011
Pilling – sooner ‘we get back to restoring the facility the cheaper it will be’…
MAY 2013
Lipshutz – ‘There’s no suggestion’ that the place would be ‘demolished’…….‘it’s for the community to decide’.
Delahunty – important that community has input to get this ‘right’ but the question is what’s ‘right’. It’s always been her ‘ethos’ that the role of a councillor is to ‘represent’ and there are strong views about this issue and community groups such as Friends of Caulfield Park ‘can inform us’ and ‘own this process’ as to what it will look like down the track and not ‘spend the community’s money’ on what mightn’t ‘be the end result’. Said that previous consultation wasn’t about concepts and ‘possibly didn’t ask the right questions’ nor ‘broad enough’. Thus she thought that ‘we have to take the lead’ and tell people ‘these are the options’ and ‘hoped’ that community groups ‘take hold of this’. They should ‘inform us’ and ‘help us deliver’ the outcomes. Previous survey ‘only heard from 312 people’ and that’s ‘possibly not enough’ and wanted a ‘more ringing endorsement’ about what to do. ‘Will cop’ that this (ie consultation) has been ‘done before’ but ‘let this be the last time’.
Pilling: Said that the last resolution was to fix up the conservatory and ‘protect’ it and that this motion just ‘delays that’.
SEPTEMBER 2013
Delahunty – ‘that’s the process, that’s how it should happen’ that people are asked. ‘I really want to see the community involved in this’ so that in ‘ten years time’ if it comes up again. Wanted community groups to put forward their ‘great ideas’ and that it ‘encourages interaction’. ‘It’s a very clear outcome now’.
Pilling – acknowledged that there were divergent views from councillors but they were motivated by the desire to use ‘the conservatory better’ and ‘this has been justified by the consultation’. Ultimately ‘this is a win for everyone’.
Glen Eira Debates 
April 30, 2014 at 10:52 AM
Pilling’s been a lost cause for ages and Delahunty is to concerned about playing politics. Seconding Lipshutz all the time of late says plenty.
April 30, 2014 at 10:57 AM
If you can’t beat them join them. Come on Cr Delahunty have you given up already.
April 30, 2014 at 10:54 AM
What a disappointment. Why did they ask me and many others that we wanted then just ignored our view?.
April 30, 2014 at 11:35 AM
Who is pulling the strings here? $300,000 or even $400,000 is a drop in the ocean for these guys. There is a lot more going on than meets the eye. Wait a couple of years maybe and there will be a cafe or a kiosk that wants to set foot in the park.
April 30, 2014 at 2:40 PM
Thanks for reporting this. We are two of the many, many residents who stated we wanted the conservatory restored. Fat lot of good council’s “consultations”!!!
April 30, 2014 at 2:53 PM
What an absolute mockery this makes of all Glen Eira’s claims of valuing and encouraging community participation, consultation and input. And so much for Councillors representation role.
They should save us the frustration and state up front that unless the ratepayers views align with the Administration they will be ignored. The only open question has to do with timing, ie for how long will the Administration allow the charade of consultation to continue before it drops the boom.
April 30, 2014 at 4:00 PM
Another aspect that is worth talking about when consultation is mentioned is the cost of all these consultations. A fortune has been spent on this issue and each time results come back that don’t favour the intended actions another consultation has been undertaken. Instead of spending this money on preserving the conservatory it has been wasted and the place allowed to go to rack and ruin. That’s deliberate and is the standard tool used by this administration for so many things – it costs too much to repair is the constant refrain. I would much much rather that there were no consultations whatsoever if the only purpose is to deceive and meet legal requirements. Unless there is a real commitment to listening to what residents want and acting upon the stated wishes then save the hundreds of thousands and cut rates instead.
April 30, 2014 at 3:06 PM
Once again it’s Magee that stands up for Caulfield. Sounness I think is starting to realise that sometimes you need to stand fast and not follow the others. Very disappointed in Delahunty.
April 30, 2014 at 6:54 PM
The point about “consultation” is not to incorporate community views in the eventual decision, but to be able to say that the community was “extensively” consulted. Master spinners sometimes go further and imply that the eventual decision was “informed” by the consultation process. I too took the trouble to provide feedback about the conservatory, but my batting average with Council probably stands at around 17 ducks in a row. Any time I express an opinion to Council, I get a response randomly selected from one of the following: “get f–ked”; “baseless”; “no”; “inappropriate”; “being addressed”; “considered reasonable”; “inadvertent mistake”.
While I have enjoyed the conservatory, and taken many photos of the structure and contents, it doesn’t come as a surprise that councillors want to replace it with something that makes more money for people with influence. Hence the two-step process: scrap conservatory; grant permit for construction of new cafe. No need for Council to write to me, it’s clear which response from the list they’ve chosen.
April 30, 2014 at 10:14 PM
Pretty good to read the stuff that comes out of some mouths and see what happens a couple of months later. Shows how nothing they say is to be believed and I wouldn’t trust any of them as far as I could throw them.
May 1, 2014 at 7:44 AM
The writing was on the wall prior to the last consultation when Councillors described the conservatory as a “Ripponlea reject”. Although, such a term
totally ignored the fact that in the 1930’s Council purchased (from the Ripponlea estate) and installed the historically classified conservatory for a sum of 30,000 pounds, the term totally summed up the Administrations “get rid of it” view. The Administrations view being completely opposite to the view repeatedly expressed by the community since 2006.
Last time round (2013) Councillors supported the community’s expressed view. This time round, without any further consultation, they support the Administration – and from their comments have little or no recollection of what they previously said or voted for.
Great job Councillors – NOT!!!!!
.
May 1, 2014 at 8:59 AM
None of them serve their Wards or the residents. Like spineless jellyfish they serve the CEO.
May 1, 2014 at 2:53 PM
Council’s 2014 Draft Community Engagement Strategy is now available in the various Libraries. Submissions due 21/5/2014.
The first sentence in the Executive Summary reads
“Council is committed to governing the City of Glen Eira in a democratic, open and responsible manner in the best interest of the whole community.”
Right about this time nausea set in but I read on.
Page 5 includes in the list of community engagement benefits are:
. Leads to better decision making
. Builds trust and confidence
The nausea became so bad that I could read no more!!!!!! No wonder no Councillor has bothered to read it, much less apply the principles it espouses.