Commissioner inappropriate person to negotiate Canning’s future (part one)

number 1
number 1 (Photo credit: Leo Reynolds) CC NC ShareAlike Flickr

Commissioner Linton Reynolds was appointed by the Barnett Govt to ensure continuity of services to ratepayers and staff.

Unelected and paid a salary, Mr Reynolds will be here for a very long time, as inquiries are dragged out, and costs mount.

Liberal politician Mike Nahan’s constant attacks on Canning Council (as opposed to the actions of staff – whom councils do not control on a day-to-day basis) played a powerful role in influencing public perception of the Council.

Today, the Commissioner is photographed regularly with Mike Nahan, loaded on to Mr Nahan’s social media outlets, and Mr Nahan assures us he is working with Mr Reynolds to address issues.

But whose issues?

Only Liberal politicians were used in the inquiry into Canning that produced damning findings against Council members.

Under the Barnett Govt the evidence the Councillors provided, as to why things happened the way they did, was suppressed from our view.

There is no indication this won’t also be the case for the 2nd inquiry.

Commissioner Reynolds stated recently, at a public meeting at City of Canning, that the 1st inquiry had created the perception that Canning had problems, and, as a result, other councils were eyeing us as a place to carve up when council boundaries are redrawn.

Yet no more problems existed within our city than anywhere else.

We already know Canning Vale will be claimed by another council (Armadale).

What other changes might occur – negotiated by Mayors who’ll remain in place long after the Commissioner goes, but who the state will have to deal with in the future?

Most Mayors didn’t support amalgamation in the first place – are we to be their sweetener?

WA Labor is not interested in forced amalgamations, but political expert Harry Phillips said on 6PR recently that a re-elected Barnett Govt would move quickly on the issue, if it is to change local governments forever in its second term.

CanningAccountability has only been around for 10 weeks, but nearly 2,500 interested people have visited the site.

People are talking about the issues being raised.

The Liberals have been everywhere here, all over the shutting out of our elected representatives’ eyes, ears and knowledge, for up to two years.

The question needs to be asked:  All things considered, is the Commissioner an appropriate person to negotiate permanent change on our behalf?

Stayed tuned for part 2.

Advertisements

One thought on “Commissioner inappropriate person to negotiate Canning’s future (part one)

  1. Reynolds is not interested in Canning, he is a puppet fro Barnett, and City is rune by a puppet CEO, who is so incompetent, he had to employ 2 former CEOs. from Vic Park, to help him do his job, and as evidenced at last Council meeting, things are still being done wrong, and City still quote incorrect dates, and who is pushing both, CEO and Commissioner, Mike Nahan, sitting Member for Riverton, who with help of a Beeliar Councillor, who has suddenly resigned, to avoid disgrace, publicly, helped Willetton organisations, receive approx $250K from Council, direct from City Execs, with no input or consideration, from Council, in 2010/11/12, prior to 27 Nov 2012, and now that CEO has only one person to convince, it may get worse.

    Like

Comments are closed.