Keppel candidates on council border dispute
EVERY election The Morning Bulletin provides candidates the opportunity to inform voters about how they would address the region’s key issues.
From road safety to health care and crime, here’s where you can learn more about your local candidates’ take on five pressing issues.
A new question and answer will be revealed daily over the course of this week – see Tuesday’s article here.
Any excluded candidates did not respond in time for publication.
What would you like to see happen regarding the border dispute between RRC and LSC for the suburbs of Glenlee, Rocky View and Glendale?
Brittany Lauga – Australian Labor Party (incumbent)
I understand this matter is with the Change Commission which has indicated they will commence the review in 2021.
Adrian de Groot – LNP
This is another Labor fail. It’s been more than a year since this was referred to the ECQ for adjudication. The Local Government Minister needs to explain exactly why it’s taking so long – leaving our local residents in limbo.
Wade Rothery – One Nation
Owners of lifestyle properties across Glenlee, Glendale, and Rockyview don’t want wave pools built in their suburbs, they’re asking for basic services like decent roads, drainage and waste services, and basic amenities – and they deserve to get that.
Since this year’s local government elections and the new leadership of Andy Ireland and Adam Belot, residents are feeling more optimistic about the Livingstone Shire Council delivering on council services.
Satellite communities play a vital role in the Livingstone Shire Council’s rate base due to the size of its boundary footprint.
Losing a sizeable proportion of Marlborough to Defence has already meant a significant drop in rates revenue to Livingstone.
If Glenlee, Glendale, and Rockyview were to be moved into the Rockhampton City Council boundary, Livingstone would lose a further 10 per cent of its population, and an estimated 7 per cent loss in rates.
This would then impact all Livingstone Shire residents and ratepayers and ultimately lead to increases in rates.
Residents across Glenlee, Glendale, and Rockyview have spoken with me and the majority are prepared to give this new Livingstone Shire Council a chance before a boundary review is carried out.
I’d encourage anyone living in satellite parts of Keppel to start making contact with your local council representatives and invite them to meet with you and your community groups.
If you want representation, you have to start electing people who genuinely represent the region and are prepared to speak up on your behalf.
For the most part, this new Livingstone Shire Council does offer that if you reach out to them.
I do not support Labor and the Rockhampton City Council’s calls for a boundary review that will ultimately impact all ratepayers of Livingstone.
Paula Ganfield – Informed Medical Options Party
The border should not be an issue providing funding and maintenance for the Rockhampton Region and Livingstone Shire is distributed fairly.
As long as rate payers needs are met and voiced concerns are addressed and resolved by whatever shire they live in this should not be an issue.
And if the shire is not listening and resolving any issues they should be held accountable.
Our Shire and the councillors that we have elected have a responsibility to the rate payers whom pay their wages/salaries.
Accountability seems to be an issue across all sectors of the Australian Government.
Address concerns and find solutions, people in these positions should be able to execute this. Surely, there are more important issues to be dealing with, such as monitoring health impacts from telecommunication towers in our Rockhampton and LSC areas.
As, the electro magnetic radiation that is present in all our daily life across both areas is very high.
This impacts all living things people, animals (declining bees) and environment.
The effects of this relatively new technology needs monitoring as it is an unknown.
There was no risk assessment done by telco companies or government, yet new technology is rolled out and promoted as safe via clever marketing and addictive by design products.
I am not suggesting that we live primitively, we just need to apply the precautionary principle and have proper independent scientific risk assessments done like every other new product that comes onto the market.
It has been suggested by scientists that phones and the technology we use could be made safer if big telecommunication companies spent more money on their products.
Protecting our children’s health and wellbeing should be our communities first priority.
So more funding and time should be spent on ensuring the safety of our children not bickering over borders.