LINDSAY TUFFIN
GRASSROOTS democratic debate for aspiring politicians isn’t dead. Richard James, Sharon Kit, Wendy Heatley, Peter Cooper, James Crotty and John Peers think so anyway. They were upfront at the Beltana Bowls Club in Lindisfarne tonight (Tuesday) for the first Legislative Council candidates’ debate in, well, a long time.
Honey Bacon and the Libs’ endorsed Vanessa Goodwin were no-shows. Shame. They missed a good debate they would have enriched. As it was some 70 Pembroke electors eschewed Tuesday night telly and the fire or the heat-pump to listen to most of the candidates spruik their positions for the Pembroke poll on August 1.
And, they were impressive. Here’s an overview of some of their positions, moderated by Debate Chairman A. Mark Thomas (in the absence of a sick Richard Herr) and the three questioning panellists, Peter Patmore, Michelle Higgins and Louise Sullivan.
There was pretty much a consensus on the need for the Legislative Council to be a more active house of review … First humour came from Sharon Kit, who said, that as she had no living relatives in Tasmania, she could not practice neopotism; Peter Cooper decried the walls around politicians, the difficulty of ever getting to see an MP, a theme which recurred throughout the evening; Richard James wanted greater, in-depth debate; James Crotty praised the community work-ethic of ex Leg Co MP Allison Ritchie; John Peers reiterated the need for the Leg co to be a house of review, insisting that he did not want a party to tell him how to vote; Wendy Heatley wanted beefed-up and more active committee processes; Peter Cooper wanted the Leg Co members to be more active, drafting and sending bills down to the lower house; Sharon Kit wanted to listen to the electorate and act for them.
Richard James was appalled by the Pulp Mill Assessment Act process … astonished at the way it was fast-tracked through the Legislative Council. James Crotty considered it naive to think that party politics would not intrude and believed party-associated pollies could still be fiercely independent, with the ability to caucus.
The issue of canal estates extracted quite a bit of passion. John Peers would ban them; Wendy Heatley wanted to protect Tasmania’s coastline, believing there was no need for canal estates; Peter Cooper believed a canal estate would put Lauderdale on the map, a lot of people would come from around Australia and the world and boost employment and the economy; Sharon Kit said No; Richard James said Ralphs Bay was an inappropriate location for a canal estate, but there could be another municipality in Tasmania in which it could be welcomed; James Crotty believed it would be an abomination … but did not like the idea of banning proprosals outright, it should be a planning decision.
On Right to Die Legislation: John Peers believed more money should be spent on health; Wendy Heatley would consult the community; Peter Cooper was in favour of euthanasia; Sharon Kit was a strong proponent of euthanasia but would consult her electors; Richard James said anyone of sound mind should be able to make their own decision; James Crotty unequivically favoured the right to die, but believed more money should be put into health and aged care.
On issues close to their hearts: For John Peers ir was health and road safety; for Wendy Heatley protecting heritage and environment and providing clearer guidelines for developers; the issue of greatest importance for Peter Cooper was the Royal Hobart Hospital which he believed was massively top heavy with bureaucracy and had insufficent staff; Sharon Kit felt strongly about education and health; James Crotty felt one of the most important issues was honesty and political integrity and the need for an Independent Commission Against Corruption.
Richard James’ mention of Metro triggered an avalanche of complaints about Metro changes on the Eastern Shore: John Peers wanted Very Fast Trains; Wendy Heatley public transport upgrading including fast ferries on the Derwent; Peter Cooper considered the Metro changes at Shoreline positively dangerous; Sharon Kit wanted an integrated transport system with bus lanes, bike lanes, park and ride and less carparks; James Crotty said there needed to be a thorough reassessment of transport needs, for example with smaller buses and integration with other modes of transpport.
Peter Patmore asked about whether the size of the House of Assembly should be restored to its previous 35 member size (from now 25). There was unanimous candidate complaint about the growth in minder numbers to compensate for fewer MPs and the higher cost of employing them. But John Peers was not in favour of restoring numbers; Wendy Heatley favoured an increase; Peter Cooper wanted an increase and four year terrms for both houses; Sharon Kit bemoaned the lack of accessibility to MPs: she had been able to quickly see Federal MP Duncan Kerr, it took a lot longer to see Carol Brown and with David Bartlett you couldn’t get past the minders; Richard James believed there were sufficient numbers and urged voters to remember that reducing the size of Parliament was Ray Groom’s 40 per cent payrise trade-off; James Crotty said reducing the size of the House was a political ploy to blunt the power of the Greens, the size of the House needed to increase becauseof the lack of a talent pool.
The formal part of the evening ended with a question about what candidates were passionate about: For James Crotty it was developing a greater sense of communityy, cleaning up the Derwent and maintaining Tasmania’s heritage; for Richard James it was tapping into community views and being concerned about what is happening elsewhere in Tasmania (for example with the pulp mill); Sharon Kit wanted greater community consultation; Peter Cooper believed Clarence was endangered by over-development, amenity must be protected; Wendy Heatley was concerned about coastal policy, climate change and the environment; John Peers wanted to protect Tasmmania’s precious environment for the future.
The night was opened up to the public; but TT went home to post this …
PS: It was interesting to see the extent to which the Libs avoided any association with the debate: Although they have an endorsed candidate in Vanessa Goodwin, the evening was organised by non-endorsed Labor independent Crotty, the information sheet was printed by the ALP and authorised by former Labor MP Fran Bladel, and in the absence of ill moderator Richard Herr, the moderator was experienced A Mark Thomas of CPR Communications.
