TIME FOR THE RIGHT DECISION on HVC General Manager

The appointment of a General Manager of any organisation will always be topical. Rarely everyone agrees on the appointment. There will be staff members, board members and stakeholders who may not agree on the decision, but usually this is based on the persons skills and previous experience.  Not everyone has agreed on the appointment of the General Manager of the Huon Valley Council.  This is not based on his skills and experience, but instead the decisions that have been made during the recruitment process.  The General Manager decided to allow his partner to represent him through a recruitment process, The General Manager’s partner decided it was appropriate for her to represent him through the process, the recruitment panel decided the management of the conflict of interest through the process was appropriate and the council decided the General Manager was the right person for the role, accepting the decisions made along the way were correct.
The role of the General Manager is to lead an organisation. To instill trust and stability in the organization, to share the vision and the direction with an engaged workforce to deliver that vision. The role of the General Manager is to also engage with the board to develop the shared vision and to make decisions with honesty, integrity and respect. The role of the General Manager and a board is to also take responsibility when they get it wrong and own the decision.
It is safe to say, the Huon Valley Council has had its fair share of General Managers. An internet search result will provide hours of reading of the history of the council. What an internet search result will not provide is the impact of this history on employees who work at the council, many who are members of the community too. Many who once upon a time were proud to work in their local community.
The appointment of the General Manager process has unfortunately forgotten the employees. An appointment that has been the topic of media headlines for months, the topic of public meetings, a decision that does not reflect the values of the council and has created a great depth of personal stress and anxiety onto employees. The toll on the employees has been forgotten.
Employees in any organisation very rarely have a public voice, they are the silent majority who continue to work away but are frequently stopped in the community at any time of day or night to be questioned or to be asked about the council. There are many people who have an opinion on the appointment process, who are only too willing to share their opinions publicly, but has the opinion of staff or the impact on staff been considered by the decision makers?
The staff of the Huon Valley Council work each and every day for the community with passion and pride. Pride that is questioned when you are employed at a council that has been embroiled in the media and poor decision making since 2015.
Has the appointment of the General Manager had an impact on the council staff? Absolutely, the council now has a General Manager who was appointed through a process that was not managed well and is a result of poor decision making of many.
Something has to give, someone has to take responsibility for the poor decision making – the councillors have been called to resign, the General Manager has been called to resign. Neither of these requests from the community have been forthcoming. The only giving being taken is the acceptance of resignations of employees who used to work in an organisation with pride for the Huon Valley community.
Author Eric Thomas once said – “Things change for the better when we take responsibility for own thoughts, decisions and actions”.  The $1.5million dollar question is who is going to take responsibility for their decision and take action that is in the best interest of the forgotten employees?

– name and address withheld upon request

It’s not over yet for light rail

So, the Liberals have confirmed their government will not go ahead with Light Rail. Before I go on, Tasmanian Times have released a transcript of independent MP Kristie Johnston’s response to the news. She has been consistently campaigning for light rail for a long time. Most of what I’ll talk about here is also mentioned in the transcript.
To provide some context: in 2019, the Hobart City Deal was announced, and activating the corridor was one of the commitments attached, with light rail, Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) and trackless trams being the 3 main modes of which to choose from. The deal said such activation would occur within 5-10 years.
Since then, there has only been bickering and stagnation over what exactly to do with the corridor, with many feasibility studies and campaigns going nowhere. Really, the Liberals were never too enthusiastic about rail, always pointing towards cost, M. Ferguson especially spouting such talking points in recent years.
Light rail happening under the Liberals was always gonna be difficult, hence why this account exists in an attempt to help further boost the public opinion that people want light rail, either to pressure the Libs into it or perhaps elect a new government that would be more willing.
A lot of reporting insists we will now get either BRT or trackless trams. Though to be honest, it’s possible that the Liberals just drop both of those as well and leave the corridor stagnant indefinitely, it would go against the City Deal, but one should not be shocked by the government failing to live up to their promises.
So most likely we either: get an inferior mode, or the timeline works some way as to bring in a new government at some point and give hope to light rail again. Light rail is not a guarantee, and even if it does happen, it will likely take a long time. However, such was basically already the case.
The challenge has gotten more difficult, but it is not guaranteed to be over. And so, I plan to continue posting on Instagram about light rail and other rail related memes as usual.

– Ben Daly, Hobart Light Rail Memes

Political apathy in the face of political corruption

I do many stalls at markets around the state representing the Animal Justice Party (AJP). At nearly every market one or more passers-by will say I am wasting my time. Their opinion of most of our politicians has fallen lower than they can cope with. They look at what seems to them obvious corruption and pandering to vested interests that are at odds with their values and give up. My being there in front of them saying, ‘vote for me and all animals’ barely distracts them from their gloom. Sometimes they manage to offer a comment about the AJP being a single-issue party and, when they find out that is not true, sometimes I see a glimmer of hope appear.
Everybody wins if they follow AJP policies unless you want to stay in the animal harming business. It is a sad indictment of the state of politics in Australia and the obvious need for fresh voices and diversity in parliament. Let’s get back to good old fashioned honest politics, as our forebears intended when setting up the system of governance so that the voting public can once again respect those elected to provide leadership.

– Ivan Davis, Claremont

35 not 25

Tasmania has lots of governance issues, but one of the most pressing ones is the need to restore the House of Assembly to 35 seats. A government bench of only 13 members means there’s just not a lot of talent from which to form a competent cabinet. As a result, we have a handful of the same old faces each juggling half-a-dozen ministries.
Psephologist Kevin Bonham looked at last year’s state election result and estimated that with five 7-member electorates the Liberals would still have won a majority. From memory, the breakdown might have been something like 18 Liberal, 12 Labor, 3 Green & possibly 2 independent members, compared to what we actually have which is 13 Liberal, 9 Labor, 2 Green, 1 independent.
18 government members instead of 13 is a whopping 38% larger. For what it’s worth the Labor opposition would be 33% larger and the crossbench 66% larger. A win for everyone: more talent in government, and more scrutiny from the rest of the chamber. We do need more diversity and better representation.
In theory all parties currently represented are in favour of restoring the Assembly to 35 seats, but the two biggest are dragging their feet. Peter Gutwein has said he’ll consider it when the budget is in better shape (?), and Rebecca White has said it’s not the right time. These are rubbish excuses. The actual cost of 10 extra members of the HoA is tiny in the scheme of the overall budget, but in any case you could argue that it’s an investment in better governance which will improve decision-making and that in turn could improve the state’s financial position. The right time? Good leaders go out and make it the right time for whatever their agenda is. White is not particularly associated in my mind with anything in particular, so why not go out and ‘own’ the fixing of Tasmanian democracy?

– Benny Wala, Derwent Park

Letters are welcome on any Tasmanian subject, up to 300 words (we allow a few longer ones occasionally but you’d be surprised how much people appreciate you getting to the point). Letters should be concise, respectful of others and rely on evidence where necessary. No links please! Letter writers should provide a real name and town / suburb. Letters can be send on behalf of organisations or groups. Submit letters in the body of an email to [email protected]

Comments are turned off on this post…send us a letter!