 |
| Councillor Marion Miller - not there |
She wrote (and I've added my own comments, in blue, for the sake of balance)
It is unfortunate that the report from Wednesday's Environment Southland meeting chose to focus on the perceptions and opinions of a small number of councillors and did not seek information from the rest, resulting in an unbalanced report.
(Unfortunate for whom, Marion? Certainly not those councillors who are ready and willing to talk with the media on any issues they are approached about, unlike the 'majority' of councillors, who have historically said, 'no comment' and certainly not unfortunate for the public who are fed up with getting sanitized versions of councillor business)
I can confidently assure the people of Southland that the majority of elected councillors are there to assure that our environment will be enhanced and improved. We take this responsibility very seriously.
(Hang on a minute there, Mrs Miller! You are insinuating that there is a minority of council that is NOT there for that purpose? THAT'S an inflammatory claim! Have you thought this through?)
The "divide and conquer" or "numbers games" perceptions are definitely not the way most councillors operate; there is no evidence to support this view.
(Aside from the poor sentence structure that could lead to misinterpretation, Mrs Millers claim here is quite wrong, in my view and Jan Riddell and Rowly Currie were quite right to state that in their view, those mechanisms are operating in the council)
Most of us come to the table with an open mind, listen to science, evidence, facts and where necessary, legal advice to decide individually what will deliver the best outcomes for Southland and Southlanders.
("Most" of us, Mrs Miller? Again, you imply that some don't. I'm going to be asking you to name those who don't do those things, now that you've publicly pointed in their direction and accused them of such behaviour).
Win or lose, democracy delivers a result which we must learn to live with and move on to work constructively with the outcome.
(Democracy, Mrs Miller? Did you consider that having had your chance, and you were the only councillor who had spoken this way, of lauding in sugary-tones, your favoured candidate for chair, that voting with your 'majority' against the request from other councillors to speak, was democratic? Seems more like an example of hypocrisy to me.)
The most important responsibility for all councillors is to put personal perceptions and opinions aside, deal with the truth.
(Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't Mrs Miller's letter her 'personal perceptions and opinions'? Our Code of Conduct requires that we declare thus whenever we make public statements like this, but in her excitement, Mrs Miller seems to have neglected to do so).
Use our energy to constructively work together with Southlanders to deliver a healthy viable environment which we all rely upon for our health, wellbeing and livelihood.
(Music swells, hearts pitter-patter etc.)
I'm going to question Cr Marion Miller over her post-election letter to the editor at our first Ordinary Meeting of Council and have emailed those questions to the chairwoman already. I hope MM is able to clear up what seems to me some quite serious implications for the council and her credibility. Watch this space.
8 comments:
An 'open mind' is not supposed to be an empty vessel. We expect politicians to have opinions, based on their values, education and prior experience. They are voted on by constituents who want them there because they share some of those values and opinions and want them represented on the council. Councillors are not jurors coming to the table, with no prior knowledge of a subject.
You are entirely correct, corokia green. There are those however, who would consider your opinion treasonous.
My comments often provoke people to call me all sorts of things. It is appropriate for you to challenge this woman's statements. She writes like one who considers herself impartial and presumes that only those who think like her know the truth. She implies that others are compromised because that is how she views those who hold different opinions to her own. She demonstrates that she is not open minded in that she does not recognise her own bias. You Robert have a mandate and you were voted on to ES because of your values and opinions. Go for it!
Thanks, corokia green, I will!
Your assessment of the writer of the letter is nuanced and spine-tinglingly apt, in my opinion.
It reads like the output from a random jargon generator, with some linking sentences added to create the appearance of direct input from something sentient, and possibly human.
The words, as structured, are debased of meaning through their vagueness and inability to be proved or disproved.
In short, I'm not impressed. However, while I get that there have been numerous personal attacks on you in your role at ES, and this letter is another, I sometimes wish [redacted].
You'll not be buying Marion's book then, AC?
I saw a great quote attributed to Einstien recently
the difference between genius and idiocy is that genius has its limits.
MM clearly doesn't
She's certainly creating a lot of turbulence, darkhorse.
That's the last thing the 'new' chair needs.
Post a Comment