Ryan Brooke - Answers to 17 Questions - Thank you

Questions and answers read out as written by Ryan

Q3: Are you concerned at the label that Tamworth has of being the “fattest city in Australia”? Many fast-food outlets have been approved for our region. What are your thoughts on making our community healthier?

A: I think our title as the fattest city in Australia has been a long running source of shame for our city. As a council I believe we could be contributing to counteracting this via means council has influence over. This could be by improving our active transport network to encourage healthy modes of transportation like walking and cycling. Or providing healthy nutritious food options at council run child care facilities.

Q7: Should a land or business developer be precluded from running for Council due to conflict of interest risk? If allowed to run, how could this risk be mitigated?

A: I do agree that property developers should not be permitted from running for local government due to the conflict of interest risk. I would have to know more details in regards to individual circumstances of a business developer, but the crossover between council planning decisions and the property development industry clearly has room for significant conflict of interest.

As a policy the Greens do not endorse candidates who are property developers and real estate agents running for local government.

Q8: Should a member of a society or group, which requires the member to swear an oath to that society above all else, be precluded from running for Council due to conflict of loyalty between the society and the electorate.

A: I would need more information about what the society is and oaths are to comment with a better understanding of the question. I do think the concept of potentially conflicting oaths is an interesting question though.

Q9: Do you believe Councillors should be limited to serving only one or two terms? Once Councillors have left this role, should there be restrictions on migrating to other positions where they may enjoy undue influence or enjoy incidental benefits because of their previous Councillor role?

A: Broadly I would be supportive of reviewing the power given to elected councillors, and the conditions that come along with that. For instance I support recognition of local government in the Australian and New South Wales Constitutions and providing Local Government Representatives the same rights of free speech under parliamentary privilege as enjoyed by elected representatives at State and Federal levels.

I know of cases around the state where some councillors have been serving for a matter of decades. Although on a personal level I would hope that councillors would choose to vacate their position after a period of time to give others a go, I can understand the argument that if they continue to be democratically elected there is a percentage of the population that wants to see that continued representation. I’m open to the debate on term limits.

I am supportive of some sort of legislative ban on former councillors migrating directly into a role where there could be a conflict of interest between that industry and their previous role as a councillor.

Q10: Would you vote in the affirmative on the motion that has been put forward to Council twice previously; if it was presented again? The motion: That Council develop a framework and smart device/laptop application that records and publicises interactions between developers, builders and their agents and senior council staff and councillors to provide clarity of decision making, transparency and accountability to ratepayers and residents.

A: Absolutely I would. I find arguments that TRC should wait for a forthcoming requirement that such a policy be adopted by councils from NSW Parliament unconvincing.

Q11: The top seven bureaucrats at TRC annual packages total in the vicinity of $1.8 million which includes around $378000 for the GM/CEO alone. Would you request a review into the necessity of some of these roles and the remunerations provided?

A: While I wouldn’t necessarily target the remmunition or role of the GM and senior staff, I am supportive of calls to do a wider independent review of councils operating expensive in an effort to identify cost saving measures to help mitigate the need for the second half of the special rate variation applied for in 2024 and further rate rises.

Q12: Do you know whether it is correct that TRC GM/CEO performance review for continuation of contract is carried out by two councillors chosen by the GM/CEO. If that is the case, would you instigate or support a motion for that to be amended to being carried out by at least three randomly chosen councillors?

A: No, I'm not aware if this is the case. However I would be in principle supportive of such a motion. I think there is also an argument to make for all elected councillors to have a say in the GM review.

Q13: Do you think all council/councillor expenses need to be published in open forum so they can be scrutinised, queried and challenged by the community, if necessary? Should all Council projects and their progress, along with related spending and loan details, be available for the public to peruse in an easy to follow format on Council’s website? In this vein, do you support a complete and independent enquiry into the status of the Ray Walsh House building; and an audit of all previous decisions which have led to its current situation?

A: I would agree to this for councillor expenses. For wider council operating expenses, I understand that there are genuine areas where confidentiality is required. However I believe that confidentiality should only apply to matters that clearly relate to the formal grounds for confidentiality under the Local Government Act, and is not misused to prevent the disclosure of public interest information.

Yes I am supportive of independent enquiry into the actions surrounding the decision to abandon and demolish the internals of Ray Walsh House. I am also supportive of public consultation before any future decisions are made in relation to future actions regarding Ray Walsh House.

Q14: Do you think there should be plebiscites or similar to obtain consent from ratepayers for rate rises and major projects prior to seeking grants or allocating funds? If yes, what would be the minimum project expenditure amount you would recommend be included?

A: For grant funding, no. I think as a council we need to have the flexibility to pursue grant funding from other levels of government as they come up. For substantial allocations of council funds? In principle yes.

I’m cautious that plebiscites could be costly to run if direct votes in the same vein as a referendum are required. However other forms of seeking public consultation like electronic surveys I’m highly supportive of. In fact I intend to make use of them for major decisions if elected.

Q15: Do you believe the $45 million aquatic centre should go ahead? Do you know where the funds are coming from and what is being provided as security? If the approval was rescinded would you recommend sufficient funds be applied to repairing existing town pools to an acceptable standard?

A: Yes I want to see the aquatic centre be built, however I do have very real concerns about how the council have flagged they will service the loan they intend to take out to finance the construction of the new aquatics centre. I think the aquatics centre will be a great asset to our region for aquatic sports and year round aquatic activities (such as swimming lessons for kids). However I disagree with using money raised by the special rates variation to see this building built.

I would rather see the funds raised by the special rates variation be used to maintain existing council services and existings assets of significant public importance, such as Taworths two existing public pools. I also believe council would have significantly more public buy-in to this use of rate funds.

Q16: Would you be able to confirm the veracity of information that the building on the corner of Bridge and Carter Streets is being used to store Council furniture and other assets; and that staff are being invited to gift any of these items to themselves? As an elected councillor, what steps would you introduce to help safeguard the people’s assets?

A: Unfortunately, I have no knowledge of this.

Q17: As Councillors are there to serve the people and not dictate to the people, it would be very helpful if speakers were able to ask questions of Councillors at Council meetings. Would you consider it appropriate for community speakers to be able to ask up to three questions about their topic to any councillor of their choice during the meeting?

A: I would like to see a review of the current procedures to allow residents to ask questions at council meetings, not on the business paper for that meeting, at any meeting within an open chamber. And I would also like one council meeting a year to be made a town hall format meeting where residents can ask questions of councillors without notice.

Although I think I would like the format to be open to any councillor to be able to answer a resident's question, I would definitely be open to considering such a change.

===================================================

Broadcasting on Rumble every Thursday, 2pm, Tamworth NSW time.

A5R - Awareness Raising Real Regional Rumble Radio
Email: a5rmail@protonmail.com
Call-in during broadcast time: 0418 518 677
Rumble Channel: http://www.rumble.com/a5r