FOR several weeks now, I have observed the carrying on of the councillors (or more precisely four) during and following the decision to terminate the chief executive, Tom O’Reilly.
Could I make comment from experience.
A councillor is elected “by the people, for the people”, to act for them in making their particular area a better place to live.
In the carrying out of that primary duty, the councillor should engage in conversation with members in his/her electorate to ascertain the feelings and opinions of those who placed him there.
Unfortunately, I get the feeling that this was not done in the Mr O’Reilly instance. This feeling is supported by conversations in the street, and press.
Not one person has mentioned dissatisfaction over the work ethic, or community satisfaction.
I suggest to council that you will have a very difficult task in selecting a satisfactory replacement to Mr O’Reilly.
Since this current council was formed, we have seen a division in the seven elected, a form of “us versus them”, and the result being a couple that can be led like stray sheep?
To the four dissenters, could I suggest (an impossible suggest, I suppose) that you hang your pride on the coat hooks outside the council chamber and seek to rescind the decision to terminate, or at least endeavour to bring harmony back into council?
Neil Gannon
Kerang
