Hello

Jenna, I note you have published a Letter to the Editor 14 August 2012 from Judith M. Melville, Yamba under the heading Well-rounded candidates needed. Since I am a candidate and possibly well-rounded, I offer the following reply. Judith raises quite a few questions inviting response. Some of the preamble to those questions raises the need for response as well. In the preamble; It says; We also run the risk that a different configuration of councillors might decide not to follow the resolutions and policies of previous councils. My response and if elected; I will be one Councillor who may decide not to follow every resolution and every policy of previous Councils. To expect otherwise is to expect a dead-mind approach to all future decision-making on issues that have been dealt with in the past. Any person expecting that nothing will ever change, that nothing is to be reviewed, or that dynamic responsiveness is unavailable to Councillors of the day simply because they, as a candidate for election, undertake to follow some historical decision, is clearly out of touch with reality. Further, there is little to fear in the new Council not following the resolutions and policies of previous Councils. The last 4 years has allowed me to witness some significant disregard for the resolutions and policies of Council past and present. I have plenty of documented examples to share if you wish. Worst of all, when evidence of serious and blatant disregard of Council policy and resolution by management and staff is provided to Council some, and sometimes a majority of, Councillors have not had the courage to insist on even moderate adherence to their own policy or resolution. The preamble says; Gone are the days when local voters can afford the luxury of elected representatives on training wheels, who expect to be able to learn on the job. My response; It is inevitable that, with 3 Councillors declining to stand, training wheel candidates are going to put up their hand. Given little alternative on offer, this product of the present system seems to me to be the best available. The preamble says; Being a one-issue candidate is also no longer good enough. My response; Given that some of the incumbent Councillors were serious no-issue candidates for 3 years 9 months right through to the Grafton Gaol media opportunities presented to them, even one-issue candidates are going to shine brightly by comparison. The preamble says; Valley communities need well-rounded, committed and knowledgeable people at the helm of their local government. My response; I take this as an unqualified expression of support for my candidature.

 My response to the 7 questions. Firstly, I wish to make it clear that I strongly oppose the culture, evident within a very small area of Council staff, of the presumption of refusal to certain applications, even though the application complies fully with all controlling instruments and published strategy documents. That such applications are refused simply because they are personally unacceptable to Ego-Warriors, posing as Eco-Warriors, should be abhorrent to any person interested in good governance. Sadly, the conduct of Council-employees that results in excessive delays, disincentive to investment and job losses has all too often been simply accepted by some of the sitting Councillors of the day. If elected, my approach to all issues will be open-minded, and receptive to the merits and disadvantages of any issue without the encumbrance of some party-line, block or group-think dictate, or any other pre-committal type undertakings. To the questions, and if elected; 1. Should such a proposal become real, I will look at the merits and disadvantages of the specific proposal before attempting to arrive at a position. To do otherwise is in my view both lazy and dangerous. 2. My consideration of any issue that requires a decision from me will commence with an open mind and NO pre-commitment to applicant or interested person/ group. 3. Not really applicable as I have no undertaking to give in advance of proper consideration. I have no party membership. I have no interest group to answer to so my considerations will always be open-minded to the best of my ability. 4. I accept that a great fear of these issues is real. Im still waiting for my great fear of the similarly frightening Y2K Bug to subside before I adopt any new fears. 5. The political temptation is to answer with some nice-sounding motherhood statement testifying to my overwhelming love of all motherhood questions. However, my answer is; I will consider, to the best of my ability, any specific proposal for mitigation or adaption measures on the merits of the proposal. My consideration will include at least receiving advice of the likely cost, likely benefit, ability of the residents and ratepayers (or others) to pay, and the risks of doing or not doing the proposal. 6. I am unimpressed with the benefits of the most recent amalgamation. While I am aware of some benefits from that amalgamation, the Clarence Valley has yet to have Council leadership capable of ensuring the financial efficiencies and increased levels of management professionalism so willingly held up as great benefits prior to the amalgamated Council. For now, I am opposed to further amalgamation but not to the extent of denying any future possibility in the right circumstances. 7. Such an undertaking is impossible to genuinely give. Or honour. Should it be possible to give and honour such undertaking, I wouldnt give it anyway. While I have no doubts about my integrity and my ability to deal with people at face value, I do understand the great fear within a few in our community. Im not

about to give some silly undertakings simply to attempt to calm the raging fears of a few. Similarly, I will give no undertakings to not meet with any person or group. I enjoy gaining considerable insight and perspective from a wide and sometimes odd variety of people. Thank you for the opportunity to speak to the issues raised. Regards Andrew Baker