Margot Giblin
Zucco was without doubt one of the pioneers of turning an unappetizing shabby and unloved shopping strip into a cosmopolitan stretch of fun and flavour. With the evidence blinking and beckoning behind him Zucco could have claimed even more credit than he did but was concerned with other things.
7.30pm Wednesday 17 October
North Hobart
THIS meeting, convened by the Council of Hobart Progress Associations took place upstairs at the Republic Bar. It was chaired by Jim Bowler with Kevin Wilson as secretary. Twelve candidates for the Hobart City Council elections were given five minutes to sell themselves, six if they were standing for two positions. Questions were invited after each speaker. The race against the band’s start time of 9.30pm would be lost.
There were apologies for Lyn Archer, Bill Harvey, Eric Hayes, Michael Shea Timothy Smith, Ron Christie and Gary Winter.
Candidates for Councilor.
Elise Archer, said she was happy with the move up the alphabet list marriage had brought her. She was equally happy to give her age, 36, considering it as proof she’d had time to clock up the experience to stand for councilor.
A lawyer concentrating on civil litigation Archer also offers voluntary assistance to the Sexual Assault Support Service and the Cancer Council.
This community involvement, coupled with the experience of running as a Liberal for state parliament, has resulted in a strong awareness of people’s needs.
Politics at all levels has been a long time interest fortunately shared by her husband, ‘otherwise there wouldn’t be much to talk about’. Elise described herself as proactive, liking to formulate strategies in response to needs and to get things done quickly.
Margaret Reynolds, from Disability Services Tasmania, asked what Archer might do to increase Council awareness of the needs of the disabled and to improve services.
Archer’s answer was that consultation with stakeholders would be her first concern, and not just at election time on such an important issue.
Asked to list other concerns Archer added traffic congestion, and related safety issues, the lack of transparency and accountability at local government level and the failure to always include community consultation at the beginning of new projects.
Archer came across as being able to think on her feet and enjoy it. She took in what others were saying and responded with clarity. She left herself room to move and made no promises. She gave the impression that she would try to follow through on issues that were before her.
Philip Cocker spoke first of the extreme learning curve of his two years on Council, in relation to both Council procedures and councilors methods.
When he last stood for the Greens it was on sustainability. The question of where the city will be in ten to fifteen years still drives him.
His interest is in how to cope with the challenges faced, ‘including that already mentioned by Elise, transport’. For Cocker the key issue is how to get people into and around the city with ease. He flagged encouraging children to walk safely to school.
He sees the environment as facing a new set of challenges, citing the CSIRO report on fire management as frightening reading demanding serious planning from Council, especially given Hobart’s bush surrounds.
Cocker praised the work done by previous councilors on the Lenah Valley rivulet and hoped for similar outcomes for rivulets at Sandy Bay and in the city.
In relation to new buildings Cocker said he was amazed to find himself quoting Bruno Grollo in supporting the view that environmentally sustainable, energy efficient construction is the way of the future. He sees the Council’s role as educating developers and planners.
Cocker referred to his introduction of the motion to have Hobart at zero carbon emission status by 2020.
He had the Council’s 5 Year Plan with him and recommended it as a fantastic document. In asking people to vote for him, Cocker assured the audience that the plan will need councilors such as himself, with drive and determination, to see it through.
Cocker was asked what he would propose to do about the increase of commuter parking in Dynnyrne and Sandy Bay, coming from the Southern Outlet, and whether it would include liasing with Kingborough Council.
Car pooling was part of Cocker’s answer, and yes he envisaged liasing with other councils.
He saw the real problem as being a recalcitrant state government which forces Council to lead where it should be a player. 50% of car journeys are of less than 5km duration, he said and Council’s role in addressing this should be to assist with the cultural change required to get people to use alternatives.
Clearly at ease in this environment Cocker spoke with humour and a sense of perspective. He gives the impression of preferring a collaborative rather than combative approach. He sees the enormous picture and can suggest specific ways for Council to improve it.
Peter Donnelly said the reason he is standing is because he nearly got in last time. He said this election ‘is not about forests, it’s nothing to do with it’. He then said that he had once belonged to ‘the first Green party’ the UTG.
This was the first of several quirky revelations for the evening from a variety of speakers. Beyond this Donnelly added little to his offerings at the West Hobart meeting which can be read at Meeting the People. In fact he said considerably less, having been startled, it seems, by TT’s reporting of everything he said there.
He was asked no questions.
Donnelly is a very conservative speaker with self close to the centre of ambitions and solutions.
Leo Foley was another whose views have already been covered. He did stress the need for consultation and participation and for paying heed to the expectations of residents. He again advocated the increased use of electronic communication.
Helen Thompson asked to hear more on local associations no longer being the best conduit to Council. Foley said one way would be to pursue the request already made by the Council of Progress Associations for a linked web-site. He was not sure where that request now sits.
Foley gives a strong sense of belief in self and ability to come up with solutions. Doesn’t give such a strong impression of interest in others’ ideas or the need for collaboration. Electronic communication would probably suit him better than the absolute reality of this evening’s style of meeting.
Rod Force gently belies his name in his delivery. He has a degree in environmental design, is a qualified architect, and has Diplomas of Education and Business.
In the last fortnight’s door knocking he found residents’ concerns were walking trails, cycle ways, dog walking areas and outdoor sitting/dining areas.
People were also concerned with transport and traffic management. Force’s suggested response included a dedicated bus lane from Kingston and sympathetic development of the city and suburbs.
He has a particular interest in improving Council’s involvement in youth services beyond that already provided by Youth Arc.
Peter Watkins asked if Force thought housing affordability is an issue in Hobart. Force said he believes it is and perhaps Council owned land might be freed up to encourage affordable housing projects.
Kylie Scott from the North Hobart Residents Group questioned whether Force’s contribution to the Family First Party, as referred to on TT, was the full extent of his involvement with that group. Force replied that he was not a member of the party. It had been a donation only.
Kylie went on to say that she saw Family First as being against same sex parenting – At this point the Chair intervened to say that Force had answered the first question and had also reached the end of his allotted time.
Force spoke calmly and thoughtfully, to some extent seeming to work out how he felt about things as he went.
Elizabeth Perey, earlier marked as an apology, now expressed her preference for maintaining her ‘not there’ status.
Encouraged to speak she said she dreaded it but was standing for the Greens ‘because there’s not a policy I don’t agree with them on’.
She said she was terrified for the future her grandchildren faced and believed that Council could do a lot about energy use. Another of her concerns is the ‘old boys club’ ethos of the Hobart City Council. Applause drowned out her penultimate sentence which was followed by her claim that she is good at listening and at finding consensus.
Perey would need to work up some enthusiasm for public speaking if she wanted to be a serious contender.
Corey Peterson, also standing for the Greens, introduced himself as being a serious contender for a seat on Council and as ‘a gay man’. Not alone in thinking of Kylie Scott’s earlier unanswered concerns in TT put that one on hold as Peterson filled in other details of his background and views.
An immigrant from the United States he holds Green party policies at the core of his beliefs but is ‘also pro development’. He sees the hole left by the Myer fire as an opportunity to build something which could happily compete with a DFO. He felt it would only be a matter of time before one is pushed through.
In relation to the present make up of Council Peterson advocated some of the longer standing members taking a break to ensure some fresh blood.
Pru Bonham declared her authorization of Eva Ruzicka’s election material.
She talked of having been obsessed with increasing ferry transport in her time on Council.
She had ‘failed dismally’ and was interested in Peterson’s view on ferry transport. He was supportive in principle but because of the open nature of the harbour, suggested the need for back up bus services.
Peterson came across as personable and confident with a variety of concerns.
Candidates for Deputy Lord Mayor (DLM)
Helen Burnet: her seat as councilor is not up for re-election. She wants to be the Lord Mayor’s Deputy.
She thanked the convenors of the meeting.
She stressed how important their effort was given the swamping of local issues by the Federal election and the complete failure of the Mercury to cover Council matters seriously. She thanked TT and its writers.
Burnet acknowledged the presence of Duncan Kerr and the value of all politicians showing an interest at a local level.
She said her two and a half years on Council combined with her skills, capacity and background, make her a serious contender for Deputy.
Burnet came to Tasmania in 94 wanting a few years’ experience in the public health sector as a podiatrist. She stayed.
Burnet said she has the capacity to take what she has learnt from both colleagues and patients and try to translate that into effecting policy changes at Council level.
Burnet expressed commitment to social justice with an interest in the union and peace movements.
On development Burnet said she supports proposals which work to the advantage of the city in that they are ‘sensitive rather than destructive’.
Asked what the DLM actually does Burnet said it wasn’t just a matter of standing in for an absent mayor. Liason between the various groups involved in Council work is vital. She referred to the consensual model of the Greens which would stand her in good stead, as opposed to the present adversarial style adopted by Council. She believes she has the capacity to bring people together to talk and to engage the public.
Burnet is inclusive. Of all the speakers she mentioned and acknowledged the greatest number of other people. She came across as being confident in her own views and able to work with others. In a situation where decisions are made by committees this is not an insignificant thing.
Eva Ruzicka: described herself as ‘a serious contender, again’. She referred to ‘the vision thing’ which she regards as important. This vision is formed from listening to people. Key issues are people’s desire for their neighbourhood to be comfortable and the protection of heritage. Ruzicka flagged the need to address rates in relation to costing the spiraling wish-list of projects that might be put forward.
Toby Rowallan asked where Ruzicka stood on a homeless shelter in Fitzroy Place. (Council rejected the proposal and is fighting the overturning of their decision in court).
Her answer was: ‘I think there should be one there, but the process was not good. Bridges are now burnt with neighbours. It shouldn’t have been the size proposed, which was a money making venture.’
A confusing comparison with the cat centre then took the focus off Fitzroy Place to which she later returned. She accused decision makers of acting on ‘not in my suburb’ criteria.
Ruzicka spoke with vigour. She gives the impression that her ability to liase with residents is perhaps stronger than her ability to work in harmony with or acknowledge the worth of other councilors.
Marti Zucco: I’m Marti Zucco. I’m passionate. I’m in love. With North Hobart.
Against a backdrop he couldn’t have topped if he’d tried to Zucco did his bit.
The windows behind him let the listeners see and hear the bright lights and lively atmosphere of North Hobart’s restaurant strip.
Zucco was without doubt one of the pioneers of turning an unappetizing shabby and unloved shopping strip into a cosmopolitan stretch of fun and flavour.
With the evidence blinking and beckoning behind him Zucco could have claimed even more credit than he did but was concerned with other things.
‘We sometimes read about Marti Zucco suddenly taking an interest and going on about an issue – but I’ve sometimes been working on it for years, quietly’.
The question from the audience was: Given the importance of the role of DLM how do you see yourself operating as a team player?
He replied that he is a team player.
‘ The proof is I consulted with one particular councilor on an issue. I’ll try to massage motions to get unanimous support – please don’t listen to what you read – ask me. I am a team player. People think….. there’s a perception there – but it isn’t so.
I clashed with Doone Kennedy.
I clashed with Freeman.
Nothing’s changed’.
Zucco continues to see himself as a godsend. Far from identifying any person or group he has liased with as councilor he named himself five times. He remains puffed by his view of himself and stricken when others see him in a lesser light.
His behaviour, on some-one else’s patch, is genial.
Jeff Briscoe: Tasmanian Times is here to report what I say, and probably more than I say. However –
I have been on Council for 14 years – just when Helen Burnet came to town.
It was an old boys’ club. Decisions were made behind closed doors. I think it’s more open. Decisions are debated.
My interests are bushwalking and conservation, from way back.
My first job was in a timber mill on the NW coast.
I was in the room when the UTG was formed, with Peter Donnelly.
We need to preserve what we have that is unique.
On the pulp mill we were lucky that Council was able to agree to my idea. If I lose because of it I’ll be happy.
Marti Zucco is right. We do work well together. There was an attempt to derail the pulp mill plebiscite but Marti got it back on track .
We work well together.
Kylie Scott pointed out that Ruzicka, Burnet and Valentine were regular participants at the North Hobart Residents Group. How did Briscoe see his role in the light of that? Briscoe: It’s not possible to get to every community meeting and group. Rob can. I can’t.
Briscoe sees himself as being a stronger driver of change than Valentine. His answer to Scott’s question demonstrates the difficulty he has with remaining focused.
Rob Valentine prefaced his talk by saying that cities are about people. Without people things don’t exist.
He went on to say that behaviour on Council has been unacceptable. It doesn’t need to be adversarial – it’s not Parliament. Opposition comes as a result of personality difficulties – and it’s not necessary.
We need to take care not to deny respect to any individual at the table.
We each have a vision but it is the Strategic Plan which comes from the community that matters. The twelve councilors round the table need to push the community generated Strategic Plan.
Rob’s belief that business can be conducted civilly is sincere but he finds himself continually being put to the test. There are a number of councilors who delight in being naughty and waiting to be told to behave. Valentine doesn’t have the authority they crave.
No questions were asked as by this time the music had well and truly won. It was suggested that candidates stick around, mingle and answer individual questions.
TT asked Rod Force for his definition of family. His answer was ‘any unit which raises children’. Asked if this would include same sex parents Force thought a bit before proffering ‘Same sex families come about, don’t they. They evolve. So yes, I would include them’.
