Opening introduction from four of the five candidates waffled on about better communication, efficiencies, performance, productivity, environmental sustainability and so on, they all sounded the same. Only one candidate presented tangible facts and data of previous achievements and were future financial improvements can be gained.

The gallery forwarded relevant important question and expectations of the newly appointed Mayor. The Q & A session was a platform for candidates to show their passion and personality to fulfill the Mayor position.

I raised a question to the current three councillors of “if elected what can you do better as Mayor that you currently can’t do as a councillors? In addition, where do you propose to make savings to cover the cost of another by-election?”

Turner waffled on about the electoral process but could not commit to anything and did not answer the question. Griffiths did have financial data on future savings and improvements that substantiated her answer. Intemann said she will not credit mine or anyone’s rates to cover costs (that was not within the question). Intemann went on to say election costs only come at $10 per ratepayer that is minimal in the bigger picture. In my view if we have three elections in one year, is that the same as spending ($1.5 million = $30 per ratepayer) with a result of councillors moving from one seat to another.

A question was asked directed to Pinson of her company’s cost saving technology if not available how council could use this without impeding the Mayor position. She returned with history and several options given to council. Pinson advised if elected her company would be legally obligated not to tender to the council. 

Phil Rummery, Port Macquarie