From my perspective there’s a sting in the tail near …

Comment on Politely passionate: council candidates front invited guests by Alex Nelson.

From my perspective there’s a sting in the tail near the end of this report concerning both mayoral candidates appealing “to voters to look at their records: nine and half years at the helm of council for Mayor Ryan, during which he “never left  a stone unturned”; 10 years in town for Mr Cocking, who took up the directorship of ALEC and has served on a number of other boards” but – perhaps significantly – observing that “it is fair to say that Mr Cocking’s pitch was more forward-looking in his emphasis on the necessity for a long-term plan that looks to where Alice will be in 2050”.
There’s an element of history repeating here. In May 1992 I was heavily involved in Andy McNeill’s election campaign contesting incumbent Leslie Oldfield, who had been a very popular mayor of Alice Springs for nine years. The clearest distinction between the two candidates was that Mayor Oldfield campaigned on her record whereas McNeill emphasised a vision for the future (incidentally, there were three candidates for mayor that year, including Alderman Harvey Millard).
The town council elections of 1992 were held against a backdrop of severe economic recession, a downturn in tourism and rampant crime and anti-social problems, which remain fairly familiar contemporary themes affecting Alice Springs to this day.
Leslie Oldfield had set the record as the Alice’s longest serving mayor (now eclipsed by Damien Ryan) but suffered the ignominy of becoming the first and so far only incumbent to lose office.
There were a number of other aspects to that campaign from a quarter century ago which affected the end result but the vital lesson I took away from it was never to rely entirely upon your track record for re-election without offering policies for the future, otherwise there may be just enough voters to say “thank you very much for your service, but good-bye”.

Recent Comments by Alex Nelson

A touch of light: crows
As a tiny infant the very first intelligible sounds I emitted was not “mum” or “mama” or any human word, it was the calls of crows.
When I was a few months old my mother would sometimes put me in a bassinet under the porch or shade of trees; and crows would gather in the branches, maybe with the prospect of a feed in mind.
In a role reversal of the usual interspecies communications between man and bird, I quickly learned to mimic the calls of the crows – I’m told I was very good at it.
Sadly, I’m no Dr Doolittle, I’ve no idea how to interpret crow-speak; but no doubt there are some who hold I’ve been away with the birds ever since.

The two territories at opposite ends of car sales stats
All the more reason to bring back Canberra control! (Now, where’s the entrance to my bunker?)

Cattle company has win in live export ban case
Perhaps I’m reading more into this decision than is warranted but it occurs to me there is possibly a principle of law here which may have much wider application.
I’m thinking in terms of government policies and decisions that have an influence or impact on climate change without due regard to scientific advice.
Are there wider implications from this decision?
While this case may rest with the decision of the Federal Court if the Commonwealth Government opts not to appeal it, I can foresee a similar case being pursued in the High Court of Australia to resolve what degree of responsibility the Commonwealth (and, for that matter, the NT Government, which is a creature of Federal law) has in regard to abiding by professional, fully researched scientific advice.

Country Liberal Party: custodians ignored on gallery
@ Surprised! (Posted June 1, 2020 at 7:25 am): Too timid to use your own name, and too dumb to get another person’s name right. No credibility in your comment.

Country Liberal Party: custodians ignored on gallery
@ Jack (Posted May 29, 2020 at 2:11 pm): Whatever amount of money “we” decide to “stump up” gives us no right or authority to dictate terms to Indigenous people on how or where their art and culture may be displayed for others.
What they decide might not cost as much as $50m; indeed, it’s the NT Government, not custodians and TOs, that “stumped up” that sum of money so it’s hypocritical to blame the latter.
And, if custodians and TOs decide they don’t want to go down this path at all, then the money becomes a moot point, doesn’t it?

Be Sociable, Share!

A new way to support our journalism

We do not have a paywall. If you support our independent journalism you can make a financial contribution by clicking the red button below. This will help us cover expenses and sustain the news service we’ve been providing since 1994, in a locally owned and operated medium.

Erwin Chlanda, Editor