Shire bashing?

What is shire bashing?

Trying to get an answer to questions you feel it necessary to ask?

Complaining about something that you believe to be wrong?

Is it wrong to insist that you are afforded your rights, be they consumer protection rights, democratic rights, or human rights?

Would a whistle blower be a shire basher? Is it still shire bashing if a whistleblower is exonerated and found to be correct in their accusations?

Was Erin Brokovitch an Alcoa basher?

If she was then the whole community of Yarloop were also bashing every organisation who covered up their appalling actions for decades. How wicked of those community members to insist on getting attention.

Are the judgemental souls who choose to label the shire critics as “shire basher” also critical of those people who complained that Telstra had overcharged them for international roaming?

Was that Telstra bashing?

Or are those who accuse others of shire bashing, who choose to invoke the all encompassing, and completely unexplained, phrase “shire bashing”, merely expressing their own short hand notation for;

“I don’t care about the same things you care about. I don’t share your opinions, therefore I will try to devalue your expressions of discontent by giving it an emotionally charged tag”

Their behaviour is similar to the “usual suspects” tag. Emotion charged but not very insightful. Or the appeal to numbers that some councillors use in defence of nonsense, “There are only two people complaining,” should not be allowed to sway an argument. The first person to report a nuclear accident is just one person, but they matter. Somebody will always be the one, and the second will be the two, but if they are telling the truth then how many should not be the issue.

Numbers of people can be important in deciding actions, assessing risks, but not during an argument about specifics of process or similar.

For example; if there was no community consultation meeting it does not matter whether two people complain or two hundred, it is still a failure of the agreed process. The shire administration failed to complete the consultation mechanisms agreed by our elected Council and recorded within the shire minutes.

Another example; if there was no letter drop to ensure those residents renting would be aware of a planning activity affecting their community then the shire administration failed to execute the process agreed by our elected Council. The administration failed us all, regardless of whether we all know about this failure, or just a few of us.

A third example; our councillors voted to approve a town site strategy subject to the addition of a clause within the strategy. The shire failed to enter the clause and sent the strategy for endorsement by the WAPC without it. This is another failure of the administration to execute the wishes of our elected representatives.

These are all failures of the shire administration, the paid professionals.

In none of these cases do we need thousands of residents to make reports. The shire administration failed to action the wishes of our elected councillors.

Our councillors may hold the belief that the shire administration is “highly satisfactory, or even outstanding”, but the view from Karridale is very different. I am not dealing in subjective judgements, just reporting failures in the due process that we are entitled to.

But emotionally charged labels such as “shire bashing” are intended to belittle and diminish the value community reporting.

But should such labels have any effect?

Of course not, but we are all human and so they do.

But have I misunderstood something about the professional administration accommodated in Wallcliffe House exclusively for the purpose of serving the public?

Is it now de-rigueur to defend this institution against its dissatisfied customers? Is the cry “shire basher” intended to stop community members reporting on mistakes, errors, and omissions?

Maybe the bloated bureaucrats would like to divert us towards some kind of talk-fest where can all express ourselves in a warm, fuzzy, non-judgemental environment?

Would you all like that?

Think it would be a more positive solution, kinder than just telling the administration to do precisely what the elected Council have told them to do? Kinder than telling the administration that they are paid to serve our elected Council?

Me neither.

If the elected Council say they want a letter drop to advise residents, then the administration should organise a letter drop.

If our elected Council vote for a community feedback meeting, then the administration should organise and facilitate such a meeting.

If our elected Council vote to include a clause in a town site strategy document, then the administration must take responsibility for that clause being included.