This morning I received a copy of the
following email addressed to the Shire of York. It was sent today at 5.43 am.
Subject: Main
Roads vandalism along York-Quairading Road
Att: Shire President and CEO
Dear Mr Wallace and Mr Martin
I notice in the ABC news article online http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-01-10/'ancient'-wheatbelt-trees-felled-york-merredin-road-upgrade/8173624
that Shire President David Wallace claims that Shire of York “was not involved
with the decision”. However, Main Roads as the applicant states in its permit
application to DER that “Direct interest emails were sent to the Shires of
Beverley, Quairading and York on 10 and 11 November 2015. To date, no response
has been received from any Shire”.
Can you confirm that such an email was received by Shire of York and
that no response was sent to Main Roads?
I would advise the Shire President to check his facts before he speaks
to the media and to reflect on his ridiculous statement to the ABC:
"It's unfortunate that a lot of those big old trees will have to go
but it's a safety thing. I would hate to see someone's child or grandson or
granddaughter run into one of these trees." What’s next: are we going to
see mass destruction of trees along each road in the Shire? What about the
walls around people’s front yards? Knock those down? Cars tend to drive into
those as well!
Shame on you, Shire President. You badly let the Shire and its
community down on your watch!
Danielle Courtin
Ashworth Road
York WA 6302
I invite Shire
President Wallace and/or CEO Martin to issue a public response to Ms Courtin’s
complaint—on this blog, if they wish.
We might
reasonably ask what evidence does the Shire President possess to indicate that
the trees in question have in fact caused accidents, fatal or otherwise. How many accidents have occurred along
that particular stretch of road, and over what period?
In how many of
those accidents was alcohol or speeding involved? In such cases, the trees would hardly have been to blame.
I’ve driven
along Cathedral Avenue more than once, and have never felt threatened by the trees that line it. Not one has ever launched itself murderously at me from its hiding place in plain sight at the side of the road.
It is true, as
Main Roads has asserted, that the traffic accident rate in the Wheatbelt is
several times higher than the state average. But that may well have nothing to do with trees. Perhaps we should all take care to
drive sober and more carefully while keeping to speed limits.
Then we can
leave the trees remaining in the Wheatbelt for future generations to enjoy.
From today's West Australian (click to enlarge):
Farmers are hypocritical to suggest trees should be saved when many of them have cut down hundreds of trees on their own land over the years.
ReplyDeleteThe trees have been there for decades. It is not the trees fault stupid drivers continue to drive drunk, take drugs and speed.
ReplyDeleteHasn't the Shire President realised, people kill themselves on the Nullabor where there's no trees at all.
I would love to see violent protest regarding this, people who feel strongly about this wanton destruction should rally and make their anger known to the powers that be. Fuck the consequences, it's all part of the process, you want it out there, now's the time to be radical.
ReplyDeleteKudos goes to those prepared to be arrested for protesting about what they believe in and condemnation to those who sit at home and do nothing.
If I could walk, I'd be first in line to be chained to a tree.
ReplyDeleteWhat most concerns me about the Shire President's statement to the ABC is that he obviously failed to give the slightest degree of attention to the possible impact of Main Roads' actions on York's struggling tourist industry. It disturbs me that he was so easily convinced by Main Roads' patter justifying the destruction of those trees.
York has enormous potential for tourism. It has beautiful old buildings, a fascinating history as WA's first inland settlement, spectacular countryside and reasonable proximity to the metro area. It's handy for a pleasant day out or a romantic weekend away.
Every time a gang of vandals comes along with an idea for a landfill, a gravel pit, an abattoir or some other equally noisome enterprise, or cuts down a landmark tree or stand of trees, a bit of that potential disappears down the toilet. (When is Council going to change TPS2 to make further such proposed encroachments on the Agricultural Zone impossible?)
It's true that tourism in the Wheatbelt generates only a very small fraction of the total wealth of the region. Our main source of wealth is agriculture. However, tourism is more labour intensive than agriculture and generates more jobs and other opportunities for the community at large. It also adds vibrancy to the town.
In her letter reproduced above, Margaret Owen mentions that tourist coaches often stop for their passengers to have a look at the ancient, majestic trees that Main Roads is about to cut down. Another bit of history gone, another blow to local tourism and more objects of beauty erased from the landscape...
Our Shire Council should be promoting tourism aggressively at every opportunity and doing everything it can to protect those aspects of our environment, natural and man-made, that could make York an attractive destination for visitors from the world over. That includes the trees of Cathedral Avenue on the York to Quairading Road.
James, Shire President's track records for major new projects in York over the last thirty years has been nothing short of shameful.
ReplyDeleteThe only Shire President with successful mainstream business experience was Matthew Reid and look what they did to him. Matthew was way too smart for certain ex councillors and ex shire presidents who had their chance and failed but can't let go. Matthew scared the hell out of these people because he does not suffer fools lightly. Unfortunately, one of those fools wrote the Minority Report as pay back. A very childish stunt remembered forever by the fair thinking of York.
The Wreck centre is the most glaring stuff up ever created. The Landfill fiasco speaks for itself. Then we have the so called 'new shopping precinct' planned for the corner block on South Street and Avon Terrace. That planned shopping centre never eventuated, the developer forced a wonderful business in the old Pharmacy to close, we lost our beautiful Ficus tree in the process and we have a fenced waste land to remind us of the council's folly.
All the developers have to do in York is 'talk big' ,'promise the world' and the inexperienced gullible councillors fall over themselves at the opportunity to rub shoulders with what they perceive to be monied and powerful people. It is sickening.
There's a saying - you can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear.
James, it disturbs me also that our SP appears to be so naive he'll believe anything he's told by anyone donning a white-collar, add a tie and it almost becomes hero worship, maybe that's what a lifetime of chewing straw does to a person!
DeleteThe similarities in the relationship between the current SP and CEO and that of two previous SP's is uncanny. The public have no idea what's going on, other than the superficial periodical press releases in the constrained politicaly bias YDCM or Shires own uninspiring website.
True to form, the SP is acting unilaterally, or is he? The CEO's no fool, he's been blessed with ingenuous but well meaning SP, which takes us back to that inherent question - who's pulling who's strings.
The closest we came to a Council overseeing the CEO and governing the district by way of representing the interests of electors, ratepayers and residents was during Matthew Reid's tenure as SP, and we all know what happened there - local and state executive screwed him over, blackmailed him forcing him to resign.
The city bureaucrats will be particularly content with our current President, he fits the required pliant stereotype to keep the status quo.
We mustn't be too hard on SP Wallace. As a Wheatbelt farmer of ancient lineage, he is likely to have grown up with a less sentimental attitude towards trees than tree-changing blow-ins like the rest of us.
DeleteDon't forget that successive governments over many decades encouraged local farmers to chop down trees on their land, which explains why the Wheatbelt has lost 90% or more of its arboreal cover since the Nyoongar people were in charge.
Some of you might remember former CEO Hooper's opinion that trees are merely giant weeds devoid of aesthetic value. Somebody told me recently that he hails originally from Mukinbudin, whither he has recently fled, and is the scion of a farming family in that district (I don't know if that's true.
As the poet might have said, but didn't (apologies to Joyce Kilmer and Ogden Nash):
"I know that I shall never see
A farmer lovely as a tree,
And soon, unless the farmers fall,
There won't be any trees at all."
[Just kidding, folks. No offence intended. It isn't only farmers, or all farmers, that view trees as obstacles to progress.]
James Plumridge14 January 2017 at 00:32 - Sod the ancient lineage - THAT should not impact on decisions made by Shire Presidents. If it does, it is a conflict of interest.
DeleteEastern states councils and some progressive WA metropolitan councils have banned the removal of trees.
DeletePeople in York produced bright yellow car stickers NO Perth Rubbish. Here's a couple of suggestions for some more.
Warning: York has killer trees.
York - Western Australia's First Inland Dust Bowl.
Mr. Wallace, if drivers obeyed the rules they learn when applying for a driver's license - ie drive within speed limits, don't drink alcohol and drive and refrain from partaking in the latest social problem for society - drugs - their vehicles would remain safely on the bitumen.
ReplyDeleteThe trees on the side of the roads are not the cause of the deaths, it's the irresponsible drivers who kill themselves and others.
Solution: Instead of cutting down all the trees on the York - Quairading Road, why not install 15 km of bump wire guards like they have on Greenmount hill.
DeleteIt would be cheaper, quicker and the trees could stay.
Why do we have to destroy trees to protect drunk speeding idiots?
DeleteBetter irresponsible drivers hit a tree than another car with innocent people inside.
Crash barriers would be cheaper.
SP Wallace told people he did not want the top job. Smythe was determined to take the top job - thankfully she didn't succeed. Now Wallace is in the Chair, he seems to enjoy running the whole show on his own just like Boyle and Hooper did.
ReplyDeleteYour poem James is much closer to the truth than you realise.
Majority of Farmers are unable to join the dots when it comes to trees, rain and salt rising to the surface.
Here's interesting James, unrelated I know but interesting all the same:
ReplyDeleteThe New South Wales Supreme Court in Wilkie v Gordian RunOff Limited and the New South Wales Court of Appeal in Silbermann v CGU Insurance Ltd, held that insurers were entitled to refuse to advance defence costs to insureds under directors' and officers' liability insurance policies that excluded loss arising from dishonest or fraudulent conduct of the insureds. Even though the relevant exclusions were expressed to apply where there was a judgment or final adjudication on the issue of dishonesty, the insurers were able to refuse advance payment of defence costs before that judgment or adjudication had taken place.
Could it be that past behaviours have now become the 'fly in the ointment'?
Yes, I suppose it could. Here's a hypothetical scenario, plucked at random from the cool night air:
DeleteA local government CEO with a compliant council misuses his power and authority to persecute a business owner, eventually driving him out of business. The business owner sues the council in negligence for having failed in its duty of care towards him by having taken no steps to prevent the CEO's malicious actions and being wilfully complicit in many of them.
The local government's insurers' lawyers study the writ and associated pleadings and perceive at once that the CEO, as council's agent, appears to have acted maliciously and not in good faith towards the business owner. On their advice, the insurers invoke a clause in their policy with the local government to the effect that they aren't obliged to cover legal costs in advance of final judgement - i.e. unless and until a judge decides that the plaintiff (the business owner) is wrong or mistaken regarding his imputations of malice and/or bad faith. Meanwhile, the CEO and the local government have parted company and he is working for another local government.
All this would have serious financial implications for the local government in question. If they defend the case and lose it, they (actually the ratepayers) would probably have to pay a heavy sum by way of damages, their own legal costs, and the plaintiff's legal costs if the plaintiff is legally represented.
Suppose, then, that the local government is happy for the insurers' lawyers to represent them directly, i.e. independently of the insurers, at least until final judgement is pronounced. Are those lawyers then entitled to take instructions from the insurers, instead of or as well as directly from their client, the local government? What about the possibility of conflict of interest?
Usually, a local government, on receiving a writ, would resolve formally to instruct the CEO to hand over the matter to its insurers and perhaps instruct them to handle it as they see fit. I wonder what the situation might be if council fails to take formal notice of the writ - I suppose the consequences of that would depend on whether or not the CEO has, or can have, delegated authority to deal with such matters without recourse to council.
Makes your head spin, doesn't it?
If I were a member of such a council in such a situation I would do my damnedest to persuade my colleagues to instruct council's lawyers to join the former CEO as a defendant in the action so that if the plaintiff were to win the case, payment of damages and plaintiff's costs may devolve jointly upon the council and the former CEO. If that accomplished nothing else, it would ease the burden on ratepayers.
Without doubt, all commercial insurance cover will normally include exclusion clauses, for example:
Delete"This policy does not insure Loss arising out of any claim...based upon, attributable to, or in consequence of:
(i) any dishonest, fraudulent, criminal or malicious act or omission; or
(ii) any deliberate breach of any statute, regulation or contract;
where such act, omission or breach has in fact occurred.
The words 'in fact' are defined to mean;that the conduct referred to in those Exclusions is admitted by the Insured or is subsequently established to have occurred following the adjudication of any Court, tribunal or arbitrator."
On the other hand, the insurer (the Scheme), knowing that the insured the Member) is a gargantuan risk, for an extra few shekels can offer a super–duper coverage package to include an extension to the policy, something along the lines of:
"The policy is extended to protect the Member (insured) against any claim or claims first made against them and notified to the Scheme (LGIS) during the period of protection by reason of any dishonest, fraudulent, criminal or malicious act or omission of any person at any time employed by the Member, or any Mayor or Councillor elected to the Council of the Member. This extension will not extend to cover the person who actually committed the dishonest, fraudulent, criminal or malicious act."
Other than those exceptionally rare occasions where a Council has the courage to report its misgivings regarding a corrupt officer, such as the recent actions of the Dowerin Council, the perpetrators will escape justice. Government agencies operate under the misguided belief that the organisation must be protected at all times and under all circumstance, in effect, covering up its crimes. Of course, this charade has nothing to do with the reputation of the organisation, this is all about the personal reputations of the bureaucrats heading them.
I believe LGIS is SoY's insurer. It would be surprising if the Shire hasn't paid extra in its premium for one of those fabulous extensions.
DeleteKnight Templar15 January 2017 at 18:44 - A number of the words listed in (i) and (ii) automatically come to mind when thinking about the way two particular people in York were treated.
DeleteI would hope the Shire President and Councillors would never consider protecting ex councillors and ex ceo for any wrong doing at the expense of Ratepayers. it would be unconscionable.
That hypothetical scenario sounds like a possibility, particularly after the way a certain business was treated here in York.
ReplyDeleteJames, if this hypothetical scenario were to happen, ratepayers would be within their rights to demand the Shire President go after the former CEO and former councillors. That would be the right, fair and honourable thing to do, after all, isn't the Shire President there to act in the best interest of the community? Of course he is and of course he would do the right thing by us.......wouldn't he????
SAB, are you suggesting that my hypothetical scenario may actually be grounded in local reality? O, my prophetic soul! Time I stopped blogging and went into business as an internet psychic.
DeleteI think the SP is there to act in the best interests of the sporting clubs - for the whole community, maybe not so much, on present showing.
I certainly can't imagine most of the present councillors wanting to go after former councillors or a former CEO. At least one of them believes we should commemorate those worthies with statues. And who knows what dirt might show up on the linen once the washing in public begins?
Statues may be worth giving serious consideration to James.
ReplyDeleteEffigies of Boyle, Hooper, Lawrence, Randell, Duperouzel and Smythe, kneeling at the feet of Ray Hooper.
Reckon it would look great outside the Wreck centre.
Change of subject but happy for Northam who have once again secured funding. This time for a new pool. Bout time our Administration earned their keep and applied for some bloody funding other than for roads and wreck centres.
ReplyDeleteOlder residents in the Central Wheatbelt and Avon Valley region will soon have the opportunity to remain close to home whilst ageing, thanks to a propsed $46.19 million State Government investment.
DeleteMember for Central Wheatbelt Mia Davies MLA says "The project will benefit older people living in the Avon Valley and surrounds and has been funded as part of the construction of 150 specially-designed houses across 28 local governments in the Wheatbelt, Avon Valley and Great Southern regions.
Dowerin, Goomalling, Toodyay, Victoria Plains, Cunderdin, Tammin, Quairading, Beverly, Brookton, Pingelly, Corrigin, Wongan-Ballidu, Naramben and Kondinin all getting a look in.
Nothing for York? What a surprise.
The Shire of Northam estimates that over the next 2 years in excess of $150 Million will be invested into the community.
Deletehttps://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=1208760732549541&id=493970294028592
Perhaps Mia - or the Shire President - would like to give us a clue as to why we're missing out again.
DeleteWhy are we surprised York missed out - particularly when Mia was involved.
DeleteShe did nothing to help York with the Landfill issue.
I am over politicians who waltz into town smiling, promising to represent us and as soon as they get our vote, they forget we even exist.
I won't be voting for her at the next election - I would rather vote for the Pirate Party!
Yorkk has to apply if the want funding. It's faciltated through WDC and Mia dosen't get a say what's granted she just secures the R4R $ from the Federal Govt' and cuts the ribbon. Our Admin need to make applications. What do they do all day?
DeleteWhat about the administration applying for a grant to cover the full cost of stuff ups approved by boyle and hooper. If the grant fails, then hit those two fools with the bill. That includes cost of paying out Law suites against the Shire of York from those who were targeted and had their lives and businesses destroyed by the Shire administration during the Hooper regime.
ReplyDeleteHooper and boyle happily condoned the ceo's actions. If boyle and hooper don't want to cover the costs of the damage done to people and the community as a whole for the YRCC, then let those two go after Ray Hooper and recoup the money from him.
Time those two took responsibility for their actions AND MISTAKES. Remember the buck stops at the top guys - you were both happy to accept the glory and the perks of the position of Shire President, man up and accept the consequences of your actions.
Ratepayers in York have been screwed enough
Remember that song....'What a difference a day made'
ReplyDeleteWhat a difference the new CEO made,
just forty little weeks.
He gave us Christmas decorations, new bin surrounds... and thank God,
some senior staff tweaks.
Our yesterdays were a nightmare, today the pathway seems clear,
What a difference the new CEO has made,
York no longer lives in fear.
Anonymous 17 January at 22:08, don't count your chickens just yet, don't be fooled by superficial bullshit and token gestures.
ReplyDeleteI suggest you save your praise until after issues like roads and the wreck centre have been addressed and resolved.
Christmas decorations....give me a break, if that's all it takes to convince you the sun shines outa the CEO's you know what, you need to go dry those dewy-eyes.
These three senior execs are paid bucket-full's of dosh to manage York affairs, if its all about bins and decorations we should ditch the organ grinder and keep the monkey, it'll be cheaper.
Substitute the rose tinted specs for a clear lens FFS!
Anonymous17 January 2017 at 23:13 - What about laying blame for the poor roads and wreck centre at the feet of those responsible. Have you forgotten two are still on council. Another current councillor was heavily involved in the wreck centre via a sporting club.
ReplyDeleteDo you believe those three will allow the public to be told the truth about the mess?
Hokum!
DeletePresumably the 'two' you refer to as "still on council" are Wallace and Smythe and the third incumbent, "heavily involved in the wreck centre" , Randell?
In answer to your question - no, the public will not be told the truth about any local government activity, nothing will ever change there, governments (executive or legislative arms) rarely, if ever tell the truth, you're living in cuckoo land!
Apart from the frequent outright lies, governments lie by omission and/or misrepresent the truth, the news is full of it.
Putting the new CEO on a pedestal is not going to help anyone, holding him accountable will. Sycophants like you fail to understand the council have a perfunctory monthly role to approve decisions made by the administration department (CEO).
Council does NOT make the decisions, it merely approves the decision already made by the executive.
Go ask the CEO next time you take him an apple.
According to the Local Government Act, the elected council is the governing body of every local government. I've written about this at some length in the past. It is the purpose and function of the council to make decisions based on agreed policy that accord with the best interests of residents. I've written about that too.
DeleteThe role of a CEO is to ensure, by giving proper advice, that council's decisions are consistent with law, and then to give effect to those decisions. It is not prima facie the CEO's role to make decisions for the council.
However, the Act empowers councils to delegate aspects of their authority to the CEO. This means that responsibility for certain categories of decision may routinely be left to the CEO, instead of falling exclusively within the scope of council.
Where you have an honest and well-intentioned chief executive and councillors who are not only honest and well-intentioned but also armed with a reasonable capacity for analytical thinking, that process of delegation usually works extremely well, especially as a council has power to revoke specific delegations if it believes they are being exercised contrary to residents' interests. Problems arise when those conditions aren't met, e.g. when the CEO is sly, power-hungry and/or greedy, and councillors are either simple-minded and have no clear understanding of their role, or see themselves as representing a narrow band of community interests, or just their own interests, rather than the interests of the community as a whole.
I don't believe our current CEO is dishonest and evil-intentioned, though I think he and his staff could be doing a better job of communicating simply and directly with us forelock-tuggers on the street (David Taylor has written about that on our sister blog, and I shall be having a go at the matter from my own perspective before very long).
It's better I say nothing about our current crop of councillors...except to express the ardent wish that they were all as good as the best of them, and that the best of them constituted a majority. They've made some ridiculous decisions - notably the decision to divert money earmarked for repairs to the swimming pool (which everyone can use) to the re-turfing of the YRCC tennis courts for the sole benefit of members of the tennis club. What were they thinking of? Were they thinking at all? And who sneaked that re-turfing into the community plan?
Blimey James you sound like one of them. The point I was making was that the new CEO should not be placed on a pedestal just yet and that decoration and bins arn't going to turn things around, ever!
DeletePut him on a pedestal by all means but stick spikes in below and shake it up a little now and again.
It's all academic, he doesn't need a pedestal while he lives an ivory tower.
Now you've got me worried. I was just trying to be fair and reasonable. As a matter of principle and common sense, I don't put anyone on a pedestal. Everybody has feet of clay - even I've been known to slip up now and then, usually because I was trying to be fair and reasonable.
DeleteIf the CEO lives in an ivory tower, it's because Council is falling down on its job. I pray that the hero-worship directed at him by certain councillors doesn't go to his head and that he never loses sight of or tries to exceed the limitations of his role. If he does, he can expect no mercy from this or I daresay the other blog. The same goes for his senior staff.
In the best interests of the residents and community give us a break the town has been Testered and from all accounts it is being sCrewed.
DeleteI like it, very clever.
DeleteSo - what has Mr Crewe done (apart from recommending that Council approve a tender for re-turfing of the tennis courts, and that was probably being pushed by the Shire President) to attract your ire, Anonymous 18/1 @ 21:26?
DeleteExactly the point, what has he done? You're correct about the shire president, Mr Wallace seems to be making a lot of decisions arbitrarily, decisions which in the scheme of things, stand him in better stead for re-election.
DeleteIt doesn't matter which tier of politics you look at, the incumbents up for re-election all play the same point scoring games!
Anonymous19 January 2017 at 01:53 - I will lose faith in God if Wallace gets re-elected.
DeleteHistory has proved Farmers don't make good Shire Presidents.
The Police say speeding resulted in 62 killed on our roads and 375 serious injuries resulted from speeding.
ReplyDeleteNote the cause was SPEEDING - nothing about those killer trees Mr. Wallace.
Anonymous17 January 2017 at 23:13 - There is nothing wrong with acknowledging what has been achieved.
ReplyDeleteWe have much to be thankful for. We are rid of Ray Hooper, Tyhscha Cochrane, Gail Mazuik and Gordon Tester.
What is wrong with acknowledging the Christmas decorations? We haven't had them for years!
The new bins and their surrounds are much nicer than the ugly smelly half skip bins we had in the CBD before. Ray Hooper couldn't even provide us with decent bins!
The sub standards roads and the wreck centre are the result of a series of badly chosen councillors who were happy for Ray Hooper to control them.
I remember Inside Cover in The West described the York Council as a Three Ring Circus. I think Boyle was Shire President at that time and Pat Hooper his Deputy. With Ray Hooper as CEO it was pretty much a three ring circus.
None of the councillors during the Hooper time understood he was their employee. They treated him like a guru.
Matthew Reid was the first person with a brain to be elected onto the York council. Unfortunately for Matthew, one particularly nasty apology for a human showed how low certain people in this Town will go to make sure the truth is covered up.
When your rates go up, send a Thank You card to Ray Hooper in Mukinbudin. Oh and don' forget to send one to Tony Boyle and Pat Hooper while you are at it.
Hang on a minute, Wallace said he did not want to be Shire President. He only took the job to stop Smythe becoming queen bee.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous19 January 2017 at 01:53 Are you saying Wallace likes the job and is going to stand again?
Has he become more comfortable with the $40,000 a year or is it the POWER of making decisions without consulting his councillors driving him?
Will York ever have a Shire President who doesn't let the position go to their head?
Are you sure SP Wallace is making decisions independently of his colleagues? That's not my impression.
DeleteMayors or SPs aren't authorised by the LG Act to set up shop as dictators. They have some special functions, notably as spokesmen for their local governments, but really they are 'first among equals', bound like other councillors by the process of collective decision-making.
If you think York has problems, consider the case of Gambia in West Africa. At an election on 1 December 2016 Yahya Jammeh, who seized power in a military coup in 1994 and had held it ever since, lost the presidency to a long-time opponent, Adama Barrow. While president, Mr Jammeh has vigorously suppressed dissent, restricted press freedom, persecuted homosexuals, had people prosecuted for witchcraft and advocated herbs instead of Western medicine for the treatment of AIDS and cancer.
At first Mr Jammeh said he would accept the election result, but he soon changed his mind and declared his intention of staying in office 'for the next billion years'.
Mr Barrow was sworn in as president today, in Gambia's embassy in Senegal. Meanwhile, troops from several West African nations are currently crossing into Gambia with the aim of winkling Mr Jammeh out of the presidential palace.
So stop grumbling, you lot. Compared with Mr Jammeh, York's past shire presidents, one and all, shine 'like good deeds in a naughty world' and Mr Wallace appears positively saintly.
Anonymous18 January 2017 at 21:26 - yes, very clever.
ReplyDeleteAsk our other Councillors what they know about this and that and most genuinely don't have a clue. This is because Dave is liaising with the 2 senior mgrs and CEO direct on many matters.
ReplyDeleteFamiliar, sad, but true I'm afraid, so nothing has really changed in that respect. Funny they screwed Matthew over for just that- cutting corners. Funny too,that the DLG couldnt give the peverbial about York and its governence nowadays. After a probity you would think there would be some follow through. It's not funny at all really, none of it.
I don't beleive Dave really wanted the top job, but I think now he's got it, like many before him he's completely in agreeance with senior staff on everything.
No disrespect to Dave is intended, but this I suspect it's because he's not accustom to strategic planning and the like. Therefore all their LG waffle sounds like a lot of good sense. The community strategic plan is a good example of that. It could have been copied and pasted from any other plan worldwide. It has no meat on the bones. It says all the right things whilst saying much at all. Much like the CEO's deliverables. They are all wishy washy and interpretive.If you're not used to that sort of thing though it will all sound like gold.
I couldn't give a rats arse about bins, Xmas decorations etc. I care about jobs, business, rates, maintenance of our existing assets, my land value and consistent LG decisions. Sustainability has to be developed from a core. Bins are not the core of anything.
It WAS all about economic development.
It seems taking credit for bins and the removal of Cochrane and Masuik when Dacombe was actually the one that did the hard yards months ago is simply about leaving a legacy with a view to moving on to bigger and better things.
Lets face it the two Paul's and Suzie will move on asap. We'll be left as always to pick up the pieces. Can't blame them for that just sucks for us.
Nailed it.
ReplyDeleteThe similarities between Wallace and Boyle are staggering. It goes without saying, they are both farmers. Neither understand the complexities involved in running a business which impacts on the lives of 3500 people.
Strong leadership is not promoting an indoctrinated ethos from a bureaucratic elite. Strong leadership is listening to the people, their wants and their needs.
The world is a changing place, people have had a gutful, ignore us at your peril.
Strong Leaders are a rarity in this world.
DeleteThe only strong Leader York has experienced is Matthew Reid.
Matthew listened to the people of York. He knew the majority wanted CEO Hooper gone. Matthew promised to remove him one way or another, and he did.
David Wallace would have to be blind and deaf not to know ratepayers are very angry about the rate rises because there's nothing to show for it.
Where's the money gone?
David Wallace can and should provide the answer. He has been on council over three years years. He has been Shire President for almost eighteen months of those four years so he should know the answer.
Will David Wallace show us he is a strong Leader and give us the answers?
Confucius: Do not worry about holding high position; worry rather about playing your proper role.
I don't believe Wallace will listen to us any more than Boyle did.
ReplyDeleteBoyle destroyed the confidence people had in him by not keeping his word.
I remember at a public rally held in the hall next to the Church of England Boyle stated 'while there's breath in my body the Ficus tree will not be cut down'. Tony was still breathing a couple of weeks ago when buying his lunch in town and the tree has gone. He also promised to sack Ray Hooper then renewed his contract.
The only person Boyle listened to was Ray Hooper and that got him into serious trouble. Boyle was taken before the Standards Panel, Publicly Censured and forced to apologise to Mr. Saint.
Wallace is used to dealing with crops in big paddocks. Crops are $$, they get cut down, sent off in a truck and they don't have an opinion.
The Shire of York is a multi million business with 3500 shareholders and those shareholders are becoming pretty upset with the way they are being treated.
Productivity Advocate20 January 2017 at 02:35 - Does anyone know why the councillors are allowing Wallace to keep them in the dark? Are they scared of him?
Anonymous20 January 2017 at 12:53 - definitely nailed it.
Strong leadership is not promoting an indoctrinated ethos from a bureaucratic elite.
Strong leadership is listening to the people, their wants and their needs.
The world is a changing place, people have had a gut full, ignore us at your peril.
.
My goodness, could York be heading towards its Brexit or Donald Trump moment?
DeleteThe role of the shire president is defined in section 2.8 of the Local Government Act. It is to chair meetings, be a leader and guide for the community, be a spokesman for the shire, perform other such functions as the law requires and ‘liaise with the CEO on the local government’s affairs and the performance of its functions’. In addition, the president has all the functions of an ordinary councillor (section 2.8 (2).
‘Liaise’ isn’t defined in the Act, but Macquarie defines it as ‘to maintain contact and act in concert with…’ It’s not hard to see why both shire president and CEO might interpret that as embracing a process of joint decision-making excluding other councillors, but I think that would be a mistaken interpretation and one that many of us would reject.
The role of a councillor is defined in section 2.10 of the Act. It includes ‘representing the interests of electors, ratepayers and residents’, ‘facilitating communication between the community and the council’ and ‘participating in the local government’s decision-making processes at council and committee meetings’.
Frankly, I don’t see our current councillors having much success in facilitating communication between community and council. Perhaps they would do better if we reintroduced the ward system that we used to have until a few years ago, i.e. until a certain CEO figured out that ward-based councillors are harder to control.
While I’m on this soapbox, remember we have three positions on council coming up for election in September. Time to start thinking about getting smart young people to stand…
On the subject of strong leadership. In the latest edition of YDCM Shire President Wallace thanked the Finestones for the work they did for York at christmas time. How come the volunteers that spent hours in the hot sun putting up and decorating the Christmas tree for the Town were not acknowledged and thanked?
DeleteProbably because Liam and Bernie spend a lot of time through the year organsiing the kids Christmas party, whereas the tree decorators spent an hour or so and half of those were shire employees therefore paid for their trouble. My advice to you would be to drop it before you make yourself look even more silly!
Delete>> ... we have three positions on council coming up for election in September.
DeleteThe elections are in October, I believe. Will you be running Dr P? You weren't far off last time and more punters will recognise you now you've had one try.
Anonymous 22/1 at 18:51, I'll have to take that question on notice. At my age and in my current state of health, I don't know how much nincompoopery and aggravation from other councillors and the DLGC I'd be able to stand.
DeleteI think I'd also come under pressure to give up this blog. I'm sure most councillors and perhaps some shire employees would disagree with me, but I firmly believe that both blogs have done a lot for York and probably have a lot more to do yet. Perhaps I'm more useful outside the tent peeing in than I would be inside the tent peeing out.
Yes, you're right about October. My first mistake of 2017, but not, in all probability, my last.
Give it a go Dr. P. we need to get good people in.
Delete
ReplyDeleteHigh dollars are paid for Shire Administration are they there just for the money?
No there here because they care,also for the cool sunny days,long walks on the beach and all that.
DeleteMostly there too oblivious to what's outside those air conditioned walls to know or care and mostly all that money is going to but a few who know or care little more than what's outside those walls.
DeleteAnonymous 24 January 2017 at 04.29
DeleteA weekend or two in Dubi
Do I detect a disturbing note of cynicism creeping into comments on this blog?
DeleteAnonymous22 January 2017 at 18:22 Given your obvious knowledge of who did what, you may have given away your identity.
ReplyDeleteNo matter how little time volunteers give, they should always be thanked.
Nice to see Peter Kenyon recognised for his achievements at the Federal Australian of the Year presentation - he was W.A.'s nomination for Senior of the Year.
ReplyDeletePeter came to York, invested a huge amount of money just like the Saints did....... and closed his business (the Bank of Ideas) just like the Saint's did.
Another causality of the RH regime. Anyone successful, popular or creative was not welcome.
Ray couldn't cope with anyone smarter or more successful than himself.
DeleteJohn Saville-Wright invested a shit load of money into the Imperial, then Gordon Tester got into him regarding 'function classifications', it wasn't long after this, John pulled the pin. Then there's Sandra Pasket, she sank a sqillion into Lauraville, she was dealt with appallingly by the Shire and pulled the pin. Over the years there are many people who have been chopped off at the knees by the Shire of York Council, however, you will never se a 'farmer' being subjected to this level of victimization. You would have to be mad to invest in York.
ReplyDeleteA resident of Chittering built a stunning Art Retreat high above the valley on 100 acres.
DeleteThe Art Retreat had Shire approval. Just prior to the opening the owner was stopped from operating by the Shire untill a purpose built 50 car bay parking area was built. The parking area was not a condition at the time of Shire approval and remember the owner had over 100 acres of land to park the cars on.
Sound familiar? Similar illogical demands were made on the Saints by the Shire of York.
In the case of the Chittering resident, the property was sold and the owner moved to a more ‘user friendly’ Local Government area. She set up a beautiful Art Studio/sanctuary, organised an open day and within a short while the Shire approached her to see if they could hold their 'Thankyou morning tea for Volunteers’ at her Gallery.
She hosted the morning tea and her Art Studio is now listed as 'A Place of interest' for Visitors by the Shire.
It's wonderful when Councillors appreciate the value of a niche business in their area and a nightmare when they don't.
Who is blocking Laureville?
One other thing. One mans loss is another mans gain. Take the Blisses for instance. They were bailed out to the tune of 625k, while Sandra Pasket who was in the exact same business was fed to the lions. The Shire President will have people believe he is a caring compassionate man, but scratch bellow the surface, he's a farmer and the farmers run the town.
ReplyDeleteThe Shire President runs with the foxes and hunts with the hounds.
DeleteAs a business owner and investor in Yorks Future we have embarked on a huge tourist project that has never been done befor. This will increase tourists and provide jobs, it's a positive thing with shire backing, stay tuned , check out www.737-200.com.au this will add to our expanding business here in York.
ReplyDeletePlease, tell us more. The 737-200 is an extended form of the Boeing 737, so presumably this project has something to do with aircraft. Are we going to have an airport in York accommodating direct flights from China or (more probably) Perth?
DeleteYour initials are tantalizing. They could stand for Wallace Global Fund (I didn't make that up) or Who Gives a Fuck. Why not tell us who you are?
If what you're saying is true, I'm sure you'll get plenty of support from the York community.
Meanwhile, does everything have to be shrouded in secrecy? You say you have 'Shire backing', but so far as I know nothing 'huge' by way of tourism has been run past Council. Does this proposed development feature in, or is it consistent with, our community plan?
If 'Shire backing' is code for 'municipal funding' perhaps somebody in the administration is jumping the gun.
Take a look at the other blogg, the CEO would have to be a Crazy Employment Officer
DeleteAs a ratepayer and contributor to the municipal purse, if we're 'backing' what is obviously a private venture, I would be interested to know when, where and how this was decided. I spoke with a councilor this morning about this and they knew nothing of it. Could it be a Wallace - Martin decision, or is the administration going it alone again?
DeleteEither way, I'm with you James, can WGF tell us more?
I was contemplating starting a new business, I thought I'd call it - 'The Forrest Bar and Café' but someone beat me to it, they have 'backing' from the Shire, both fiscally and promotionally, lucky them.
DeleteThink ahead, people! Start serving only halal food and rename the place 'Allahu Snackbar.'
DeleteWTF25 January 2017 at 16:50 - I spoke to a councillor about the 'Boutique Brewery' rumoured to be opening in the Flour Mill - the councillor knew nothing about it.
DeleteI think it is time for a public meeting!
Lol, if you have not guessed yet WGF is WhiteGum Farm... from what I hear they have no shire backing, from what I hear half the stuff at WGF is not shire approve. and they are at war with their neighbors. So would be a waste of time and money to back it, as it will never happen, it should never happen.
DeleteWho wants a big old piece of 737 parked next to their house, just rotting away.
www.737-200.com.au. Wow. We'll be beating off the tourist with a stick.
ReplyDeleteHow come York has a Shire Community Development officer but information about what's on in York is being left to word of mouth?
ReplyDeleteAnyone know what the Community Development officer does? The title suggests she is there to Develop a community. If this is the case surely to goodness thought could be given to promoting things ahead of time so EVERYONE knows about them.
Last week the pool had a sign up saying closed Australia Day - now we hear (by word of mouth) the pool is open FREE from 12 noon today.
Nothing in the YDCM Shire page about the Pool being open and a free BBQ today.
Was the decision a last minute thought bubble?
Perhaps the Shire should advertise on the blogs. They 'circulate' daily and everybody reads them.
DeleteWhat a great idea James.
DeleteI'm sure Shire President Wallace will jump at the opportunity to keep the community fully informed. What about setting up a 'Notice Board' for him, that way he can tell us what is going on. Councillors may find it worthwhile as well.
They won't do it. They think the blogs are beneath them. Some of them probably think they're smarter than David Taylor and me.
DeleteNot Batman are you, by any chance?
WGF25 January 2017 at 15:26 - The last time York residents were told our Town was getting a wonderful new business/project, something never done before..... and........ it would provide jobs for locals, all done in secrete with Shire approval/backing - WE SPENT FOUR YEARS FIGHTING OFF A PUTRID LANDFILL.
ReplyDeleteWhy should we be over joyed with your idea - we have been shafted before.
WGF25 January 2017 at 15:26 - add to your expanding business - really? That is the sort of stupid statement I would expect from the Blisses.
ReplyDeleteShire backing? Ratepayers of York are pretty pissed of with the Shire President and the Administration at the moment - you may like to reconsider the wording of your statement before all hell breaks loose.
Yea! cynicism is not just creeping onto the blogg it's rampant among the Ratepayers
DeleteResidents of York will continue to be cynical while we see inequitable decisions made by the Shire of York.
DeleteI believe Mo's Cafe put down good quality ceramic floor tiles in the kitchen and the Shire Health person allegedly said he wanted them changed because HE didn't like the colour.
Who cares what colour the tiles are? They were new, good quality and easy to clean and THAT is all that should matter. Where in the Health Act does it state certain colours are not permissible in cafe kitchens?
Laurelville owners had faith things would be different with the new CEO coming on board - how wrong they were.
Thanks to our indecisive Council, the closing of Laurelville has resulted in lost business for every single accommodation provider in York.
If Wallace expects the Town to forget the past issues, he should stop messing Laureville owners around.
The Laureville issue goes back to the Ray Hooper days and by stuffing up a great Wedding venue, you are perpetuating the problems of the past.
Does anyone remember the fund raiser run by the York Tennis Club?
ReplyDeleteThe Tennis Club sold off Bricks with family names etc. to be imprinted on the bricks. The promise was made these bricks would be used at the new Tennis Club at Forrest oval.
Where are the Bricks?
Can someone confirm if it is true the Tennis club committee decided they would use the money raised for new nets instead?
Isn't the Tennis Club incorporated?
DeleteIncorporated bodies are compelled to account for money raised and the Committee is compelled to spend the money on the project they raised the money for.
Some answers from the York Tennis Club Committee please.
How can the Tennis Club do a fund raiser, take the money promising to display bricks with donors names on them,then not provide the bricks?
DeleteFrom memory, the donation each person made covered the cost of a brick paver as well as a hefty donation.
Where's the money gone they raised?
Sounds like a racket to me.
DeleteAs the York Tennis club appears to be ignoring the questions, a call to Department of Commerce may be in order.
DeleteAfter reading blogs for a long time very disappointed with the comments. Our 737 project is privately funded. It's also disappointing after being in this business for 17 years in york that most york poeople and some councillors are unaware of us, wake up York their are many businesses working behind the scenes to improve York. Due to commercial confidentiality this project has only been released to the public this week. I am putting my money where my mouth is rather than I'll informed negative comments. The shire has no money to add to this, so don't panic rate payers.....
ReplyDeleteThanks for the clarification. I don't think 'negativity' was the issue here. After what York people have gone through in recent years, you can't blame them for being wary of mysterious promises pointing to a bright new future. We all want York's fortunes to improve, but we don't all think in the same way, and it's hard to throw your weight behind new ventures when you don't have a clue what they are and how they might affect people's lives.
DeleteYou say businesses are working behind the scenes to benefit York. What's wrong with working openly, or just letting people know what's going on?
You say the project is being released to the public this week. So why not tell us more about it now? If you'd started out by saying that the project is privately funded, won't rely on shire funding, and won't screw up York's environment like a gravel pit or landfill, I wager you'd have had a more appreciative audience!
WGF26 January 2017 at 15:25 -Why put coded information on the blog? Why not tell us who you are?
DeleteI googled the www site you gave and nothing came up linked to York.
You say the information has been released to the public this week, it's now Friday and still we don't know about your new venture.
Please, don't think York people are being negative. We are just very suspicious when we find out the council and administration are involved.
If you have been here 17 years you should know how Saint's Diner, Laureville, The Imperial and many others have been treated by the councillors and Staff. We have watched people lives and businesses systematically destroyed over the years and now because the council/administration can't or wont make a simple decision, Laureville has stopped having weddings. York again loses out.
Ratepayers and business owners have been shafted by their elected members and the Administration for so long, it is going to take a miracle for that trust to return.
Thank you for confirming no Shire money will be used.
Please tell us more about your new business.
If you are not prepared to tell us who you are, how can we
After much searching (www.737-200.com.au) I found A Community Involved Project by White Gum Air Park with the Shire of York logo as a Sponsor.
DeleteI recall some time back an article in the YDCM about a 737 plane landing at the White Gum Air field, I believe the airfield is just east of York. I have seen a vehicle in Town with the White Gum Air flying school logo on the side.
Good on you guys.
Lets hope this time White Gum Farm put in appropriate applications i.e. Class Nine if holding functions. Good luck to them if they get away with these things, but it must really grate on others like Laurelville when it's so inequitable.
DeleteWhite Gum Air, are you the same, or related to, the same people who had set up a flying school to train rich Asian students to fly?, up, was it Cunderdin or Merredin Way?, some number of years back and it all fell in a heap?
ReplyDeleteThey were supposed to be setting up a complimentary flying school here in York and it all disappeared. Closer to Perth. Something to do with money, funding and perhaps Govt., paperwork and the students coming to Oz, and their paperwork. Forgive me if I'm wrong but I vaguely remember that this was around or prior, to the "9/11" tragedy and all went v.v. quiet. NOT their fault, but people v. wary.
Change of subject: This morning around 4.30am. I scared the stuffing out of a young man wandering around my home, after apparently trying my vehicle - all locked. If I catch him, he may never be found again, however, I do believe that he had a mate down the road a bit, whistling heard, clearly how they are communicating, so pay attention and be aware. Cops came and got a v.v. nice picture of a shoe print. Understand the last guy they caught, was via his shoes and did him for 7 burglaries.
So, people I need to get another dog, Kelpie would be good, young, perhaps failed sheepdog or one not required. Pup is fine. Something I can train. Red would be even better. So miss my old dogs, but need a new one, asap. Good home v. much assured. Male or female, doesn't matter, so long as it is prepared to make unsolicited moments, by uninvited guests, in my yard, v.v. uncomfortable!
Part 1.
ReplyDeleteFraud is a serious allegation and normally, the onus of proof is on the insurer to prove the allegation, unless the matter is discovered, tested and proven in proceedings instigated by an affected person or persons.
To establish fraud, the insurer or the affected person or both, need to prove on the balance of probabilities that the insured acted fraudulently/deceitfully.
The elements of fraud were first clearly defined in the landmark decision of Derry v Peek , in which the 'popular' Lord Herschell held that fraud constitutes a false representation made; 'knowingly or without belief in its truth or recklessly/carelessly whether it be true or false'.
In other words, the representor must have lacked an honest belief in the truth of his statement. Interestingly though, motive is immaterial, so that one may be liable of fraud, even though no harm was intended. 'Recklessly' means consciously indifferent to the truth and not merely 'negligent'. Where the representor deliberately shuts his eyes to the facts, purposely abstains from analysis, and/or consciously lacks sufficient information to support his assertion, the conclusion is open that his belief is not honest.
Essentially there are five elements which a plaintiff must prove to succeed in establishing fraud:
1. A misrepresentation of fact: This may be written, oral or by conduct. As a general rule mere silence or passive failures to disclose the truth where not actionable, even if they are deceptive. However, since Peek v Gurney (1873) LR 6 HL 377, the courts have recognised that a half truth may be just as much a false representation as an outright lie. If a representation is true when made but later the representor becomes aware of an invalidity, the maker of the statement must communicate this fact to the affected person and not obfuscate it.
2. Knowledge of falsehood: The maker of the statement must know that it is false, or be recklessly indifferent to its truth or falsity.
3. Intended Reliance: The maker of the statement must intend that his statement be relied upon. It is sufficient if the affected person is one of a class which the maker of the statement intended should rely on it. CBC OF SYDNEY LTD. v. R.H. BROWN &CO. [1972] HCA 24; 126 CLR 337.
4. Actual reliance: An affected person must have been induced to act to his detriment in reliance on the misrepresentation. It is no defence that the affected person was able to check the accuracy of the representation but failed to do so. In any event, this only applies if the affected person is provided with relevant information and has not been disenfranchised in some way.
5. Negligent misstatement: The duty of care for negligent misstatement is not as wide as the general duty of care set by Donoghue v Stevenson and is confined to those circumstances where the parties are in a 'special relationship'. However, in Hedley Byrne v Heller [1964] AC 465, the court found that the duty applied only if the maker of the statement possessed special skill and applied that skill for the assistance of another person who relied on it. These principles were applied in a number of cases involving professional advisers such as doctors , solicitors, stockbrokers and 'local government authorities' answering zoning enquiries. The court also held that pecuniary damages could be recovered for negligent misstatement.
How many boxes ticked so far?
Part 2.
ReplyDeleteIn order to succeed in a claim for negligent misstatement, the affected person must establish the representor held himself out to have a special skill. It is not sufficient if the statement is made in a business context, if the maker of the statement did not hold himself out to have expertise in the area (notwithstanding the obscene gratuities bestowed upon him). A special relationship arises where the party giving the advice carries on the business of giving advice and lets it be known that he or she claims to have skill and competence in the field in question, and is thereby prepared to exercise the usual degree of skill and competence exercised by persons carrying on that profession ; Mutual Life & Citizens Assurance Co Ltd v Evatt [1968] HCA 74; (1968) 122 CLR 556.
In Shaddock v Parramatta City Council the duty was extended to giving information as well as advice and it was held that 'the person giving the information to another whom he knows will rely on it in circumstances where it is reasonable for him to do so, is under a duty to exercise reasonable care that the information is correct.' The affected person must belong to a limited class of people to whom the defendant owed a duty of care. It is sufficient if the representation is made with the intention of inducing members of the class to act in reliance on the false statement/misrepresentation.
Reliance as an essential element? The fairly narrow ambits of both fraud and negligent misstatement were ironed out when Parliament enacted the Trade Practices Act in 1974, and then the Fair Trading Act in 1987, both Acts provide that: 'A corporation shall not, in trade or commerce, engage in conduct that is misleading or deceptive or is likely to mislead or deceive.'
The similarities between fraud and negligent misstatement involve false statements and can also involve misrepresentation by conduct i.e. the misrepresentation can occur by omission/silence. In all cases it is necessary that the affected person relied on the misrepresentation and was induced to pursue a particular course of conduct as a result of that reliance.
In all cases the affected person must have suffered damage as a result of acting upon the misrepresentation. The deceptive and misleading conduct can occur by silence or failure to disclose as much as through a positive misrepresentation. Where information is promulgated, unless the information constitutes a full and fair disclosure of all the facts which are material to enable a person to make an informed decision, the combination of what is said and what is left unsaid may, depending on the full circumstances be likely to mislead or deceive a person. It may simply be one element in all the circumstances of a case which renders the conduct in question misleading or deceptive. Similarly, in cases involving fraud it has been held that a half truth may be as much a false representation as an utter lie, for example, setting out bias passages in reports without qualification intended to influence a decision to be made by a director.
The dilemma; if the insured's actions invalidate a contract and the insurer exercises its lawful right not to indemnify the insured, where does that leave the directors of the reprehensible organisation, especially those incumbent directors who were responsible at the time the heinous acts took place?
More importantly, where does this leave the shareholders?
Very interesting reading Knight Templar 1 and 2.
Delete1 - 5 sounds familiar .....like the way a particular business was treated.
I have a vague recollection that directors of a corporate body become personally liable if they act ultra vires. I suppose that acting fraudulently or maliciously would be ultra vires. If that's right, it applies to councillors too.
DeleteShareholders could presumably sue the naughty directors for losses to the corporation occasioned by their fraudulent or malicious activities. If the same rule applies to governance in any corporate body, perhaps the following scenario might arise: X sues a shire council for loss he suffered resulting from councillors' bad behaviour. Council's insurers refuse to indemnify the council. X wins his case. Councillors pay X from shire revenue. Ratepayers sue councillors for using municipal funds to cover losses that councillors themselves individually should have borne. DLGC sacks council and appoints commissioner...
James on that hypothetical scenario, wouldn't the most honourable way be for sitting councillors to make those responsible for any loss/damage/stupidity/insults etc pay up?
DeleteI think Councillors call it 'acting in the best interest of their community'.
Then, all those responsible have to do is find the courage to accept responsibility for their stupidity and pay up.
How awful for you Jan, glad you scared the stuffing out of him. Pity you didn't get close enough to deck him.
ReplyDeleteGood luck finding a dog asap.
Perhaps someone would consider showing York seniors some basic self defence techniques.
In the mean time keep a spray can of fluro paint handy. A quick shot of bright orange, yellow or lime green fluro paint is difficult to remove and would take a bit of explaining to the Police - particularly if it is still wet.
Several years ago I offered to co-ordinate NeighborWatch for York. I had many years experience as an Area Co-ordinator and compared to the size of my suburb in Perth, York would have been very easy.
ReplyDeleteI approached the then OIC of the York Police Station - he was very enthusiastic.
I contacted the Office of Crime Prevention (OCP), they were more than happy to travel to York for a Public meeting to get things under way.
The then owners of Swann Lodge were prepared to provide free accommodation for those travelling from the OCP and a number of food outlets agreed to provide them with free meals.
All was set. Tthe last item to address was to obtain the Shire of York's co-operation. Without that we could not proceed.
That is as far as it went. CEO Hooper said York did not need NW because E-Watch is coming and everyone can use their computer to do NW on line.
E-Watch did come but it is not the same as NW on the ground.
I should have mentioned the Shire of York was the first Local Government body I had come across in over 20 years to knock back the opportunity to support a NW programme.
ReplyDeleteIf you hear a noise outside at night, only ever turn on the outside lights of your home.
DeleteTurn on every outside light.
You can see what is going on and anyone creeping around can't see you.
Thankyou Anonymous, Jan 28 @22.53.
ReplyDeleteHad I been close enough I most certainly would have done him a damage, however, I was in one room, he was in the hall, switching lights on and off, v. quickly, clearly 'scanning'.
I have several methods of self defence, which includes a branding iron, plus a "specialised" walking stick. The 'specialised' part is particularly nasty!!
And there is nothing like a smack over the back of the head with something 'heavy'. The knees don't come off particularly well either, front or back - I'm not fussy.
We did actually have a Neighbourhood Watch going, for some years, going back quite some time ago now. Lots of participants run by the Cops, unfortunately they handed over to a gentleman, who hadn't been out from UK for v. long, a highly officious ex Cop, himself - which was why the Cops handed over 'management', not realising immediately, the extreme zealousness of the gent, who forgot or didn't realise that "Neighbourhood" watch meant exactly that, folks were NOT on his payroll, didn't take kindly to being abused, got sick of 'meetings' every night or two and everyone stopped going.
The watch continued in the neighbourhood, bypassing the said gent.
Things got really out of control, when he tried to organise the Cops, down there everyday, tried to make the Cops, 'force' people, turn up to his meetings! Harassment, and 'Lead Balloon' were terms that could have been used.
When he tried to 're-organise' the running of the 'Cop shop', a bell or two rang.
It was about then that the Cops worked out their mistake and why the neighbourhood were holding their own get-togethers, changing each time, to another venue, 'just in case'.
The Cops spoke to 'the neighbourhood' were invited to meetings, listened carefully.
In the end they told the gent, that the organisation process had been changed, and was no longer requiring an 'Organiser', or 'Manager'.
I understand, he didn't take it well! Apparently, the 'Higher Ups' in the city, didn't take the gents' suggestions about their 'Management Processes', well, either!
To be fair, the gent involved, did have the community safety in mind, and was doing his level best to make it all work.
I do think, that there should be an organised process to gently retire some old Policemen, and not just turn them loose on an unsuspecting community, esp. from UK.
I also think, that when someone who had been a Cop, lands in Sydney, hands over a huge amount of money to a complete stranger, ( a 'Porter'), to take care their luggage and find a taxi to deliver them, their family and luggage to a city hotel, worth a second 'think'. I'm not sure if they ever got anything back, again.
So our first foray into 'Neighbourhood Watch' actually lasted almost two years - a rare thing in York, but showed the effort and good will, people were prepared to attach to such a programme.
It ended, as most things end in York, petering out to just a dribble and then nothing. However, because there were all these people wandering the streets and calling the cops out for everything, the crime rate diminished to almost zero - quite good really. So that worked.
Currently we have cops on a v. reduced rate, I had to wait an hour for cops from Northam, because ours weren't on duty - worse, apparently not even on call out. I did get 2 cars, with people in them and everything, just an hour too late.
This is down to Barnetts' cost cutting exercises, and cutting the Cops time is just one of these things that apparently don't effect the community, like no hospital staff, not affecting the patients!
It isn't only local Government elections coming up, people, State ones are coming our way, as well.
$ wasted hand over fist, and now we have to cover the costs of debt collection.
Time to think hard and clearly, before the X goes onto the paper.
Roma, look who you were dealing with. Do NOT beat yourself up about it.
ReplyDeleteIn this case, had you been named perhaps 'Boyle or Hooper', had been a bloke, with an air and belief of self importance, you may have been successful, but alas, you are a woman, with a brain!
Re - paint and lights, absolutely right and even better if you have 'automatic movement' lights, which switch on beautifully at any movement. Unfortunately, things like cats, think this is good fun and try it, just to watch. Who said animals weren't smart? However they do work to a purpose, so worth the investment.
Also well worth the investment, are those 'movement controlled' cameras, which take lovely pictures, esp. at night. They are going to be my next investment, I think, including some at shoulder level in unexpected places. Some of these crims, do think of dropping their heads, so you can't see their faces. That and a dog or two, just to make their lives a little uncomfortable!
Yes Jan, it took me a while but I eventually realised my name wasn't right and being a female compounded my problem.
ReplyDeleteNow I know it would have been impossible for me to set up NW with the CEO, Senior Staff and Shire Presidents (yes both) we had at the time. How silly was I to think all LG areas would embrace the opportunity to reduce and keep crime down. Fools are not easy to work with!
On the subject of cameras, you can purchase battery operated infra red outdoor/Farm Cameras. One was fixed high on a building observing the Towns Christmas Tree 24/7. http://outdoorcameras.com.au/security.html.
The hard wired (fitted by your sparky) motion lights are best but make sure criminals can't switch off your power at the meter box by fitting a 'Western Power' pad lock. You need to phone Synergy and let them know you have fitted a WP padlock.
The Western Power padlocks are available from Bunnings Trade desk - at the back of the store.