General business gives all councillors an opportunity to publicly ask questions on behalf of citizens. It also gives the media an opportunity to be aware of issues that they may be unaware of thus allowing them to report the issue to their readers and the general community. 

The removal of what would seem a most basic right of freedom of speech in any democratic country should be of great concern to all citizens. It clearly silences councillors from performing their duty of representing the citizens who elected them and now it even more clearly plunges our 4-3 divided council into an alarmingly secretive organisation. As I stated in my speech to council on Monday: "I'm sure dictatorships do not have general business". I believe in a council which works openly, with and for the citizens of Warrnambool. 

Cr Peter Hulin, Warrnambool

I attended our city’s council meeting on Monday and avidly re-listened to the audio recording published on council’s website. I was extremely alarmed by Cr Peter Hulin’s revelation in relation to his listed notice of motion seeking the reintroduction of general business, that: “[Mayor Gaston] told [Cr Hulin] that it would be voted down 4-3 … that was Wednesday of last week”. 

Mayor Gaston’s reply was even more disconcerting: “… I would like to qualify there, that I said to Cr Hulin I would expect it to be defeated 4-3 and I think that would be for the reasons that we will hear which have been going for a long time, I didn’t say it would be [4-3]”. It is apparent that the appearance of integrity has been undermined, whatever may be the actuality. In any other forum, that is enough to question the validity of a pre-conceived opinion formation on the matter. A declaration that a pre-determined position has not been taken should be demanded. It is imperative that decision-making is based on merit and procedural fairness, is without bias, caprice, favouritism or self-interest, and that it is conducted with independence and impartiality. When a statute (e.g. the Local Government Act, local law and decision of Council) confers power upon a public official to destroy, defeat or prejudice a person’s rights, interests or legitimate expectations, the rules of natural justice and procedural fairness regulate the exercise of that power. Councillors are not above the law, and the very essence of the rule of law is that all people, including local government officials should be ruled by the law and obey it accordingly. It is a primary principle of the Local Government Act that a councillor must act with integrity, and impartially exercise their responsibilities in the interests of the local community. A councillor must act honestly and avoid statements (whether oral or in writing) or actions that will or are likely to mislead or deceive a person, exercise reasonable care and diligence and submit himself or herself to the lawful scrutiny that is appropriate to his or her office.

Council’s decision-making should be transparent and the community is entitled to understand how council reaches a decision. Four of our councillors fail to abide by these principles. Achieving proper accountability of any government activity is the very essence of responsible decision-making. At the next council election reconsider whether you support the apparent biased decision-making of Crs Gaston, Neoh, Ermacora and Askew. Do those decisions deserve your trust in him or her as your elected representative? I ask that you demand accountability, as it is your money, your rights, your interests and your city that are directly affected. 

Jennifer Lowe, Warrnambool

After attending open council meetings in Warrnambool for seven years, it is my opinion that Warrnambool reached an all-time low for democracy in this city at Monday’s council meeting.

I was appalled to see time limits put on elected representatives of the people, which I think seemed to stifle democratic debate on issues. I believe precedence has been set over many years by not using time limits on councillors and that this council should be following a more traditional line. This would allow people who have taken the time to attend council meetings as well as people listening to the audio recordings to hear a whole debate and not one cut short by time limits. These time limits are so restrictive they put a councillor under pressure to concentrate on time limits whilst trying to address council and ask important questions.

I believe this will be a destructive step and erode healthy democratic debate in this city. I wish it to be noted that as a ratepayer in Warrnambool I will be nominating for Warrnambool City Council at the upcoming October elections and would welcome the chance to be part of a united democratic council that gives the people a fair go.

Christine Thompson, Woolsthorpe

I refer to “Kick the Fizz” (The Standard, February 3). The data referenced from the LiveLighter campaign fails to represent the true picture of soft drink consumption. The descriptor sugar-sweetened soft drinks refers to “any beverage with added sugar, and includes carbonated drinks, flavoured mineral water, cordial, sports and energy drinks. Ready-to-drink alcoholic beverages were also included”. Using this descriptor is not only misleading but it also inflates consumption figures.

Geoff Parker, chief executive officer, Australian Beverages Council, Waterloo