Seems when the subject was broached, a councillor rightly asked why council was creating a flags policy. The topic was shot down as being racist because two flags were to be specifically excluded and all others allowed on extraordinary occasion. So the council defeated the motion and now wants to waste ratepayer funds getting a report that will take 3 months.
"I don't believe the council needs a flag policy"..."The council should focus its attention on its scheduled policy programme and deal with real issues such as crime and infrastructure" - issues which he said his constituents were more worried about.
Since when does flying flags other than the national and city flag become an issue councils should be involved in? The next thing will be that councils will have to keep an ever-growing flag inventory and have designated days to fly, wasting more time on decisions and promulgation. Which one of the 13 who voted for has a flag making business?
Councils should, as the good councillor suggests, stick to their core business reducing robbery of ratepayers. Any flag policy should be directed and fully funded from the LGA (they do nothing else that might be useful), under direction from central government, not each council wasting ratepayers monies and time on non-core business.
It is easy to see why councils are failing ratepayers. Failing to follow national building laws and possibly their own bylaws, core business that should be more pressing at this time. I always thought overcrowding was a well known pre-cursor to the spread of third world diseases, but do we see any action from councils on overcrowding evictions? Can we expect to see territorial bureaucracies mobilised from the gargantuan closed shop housing inspectorates feeding off the ratepayer teat to enforce such laws?
Like hell, too busy flying flags on non-core business.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment