Beyond their duty?
THE tone of councillor Ron Cooper’s letter, published October 4, demonstrates exactly why the council should not have bought into the issue of same sex marriage.
He uses words such as saddened, angry, disbelief, timid and of course love.
All good and fine, but at the very least, he should have excused himself from the vote since, prima facie, he demonstrates he was not capable of making a balanced and objective decision as demanded of his elected post. But I deviate.
On the general question of the council’s resolution, I don’t recall that councils or indeed the Liberal Party, Labor Party, AFL, Qantas, and all the rest of the companies and clubs wishing to have their say actually are included in the survey.
This is a personal and controversial matter.
It might be said that council has the legal right to take up such causes.
Maybe, but that doesn’t mean they should, especially when the issue is not regional-specific or has no direct regional-specific implications.
Council already has enough local and divisive issues regularly brought to it
for consideration and resolution without adding to the list themselves on issues peripheral to its elected mandate.
It might be said that the mandate of local councils these days is much broader than roads, garbage, water, development, environment
and sewage. I suspect this has come about, if true, simply because councils have taken that for themselves when no one was looking.
This tends to happen when power is given to people who don’t normally wield power.
Or maybe, to be kind, they believe they’re not busy
enough. In any event, where does it stop? Can we expect the council to next have a view on euthanasia when that comes up for the vote?
Religious discrimination? Refugee policy? Freedom of speech? — Ian Robinson, Casuarina
HEATED DEBATE: Tweed Shire Council voted in support of publicly backing a “yes” vote for marriage equality.