TOPIC:

Is it possible for Emperor Barnett to be any more arrogant than he currently is? How dare he presume to say that local governments can not get involved in political discussions? Using that logic that would have precluded the councils from campaigning against Emperor Barnett's council amalgamations.

I have news for Emperor Barnett we are ready to remove you and your arrogant and incompetent government.

ok 42...so you think it's ok for councils to come out and ban the burqa in their particular area or have a stance in support or otherwise on gay marriage and so on?

BC wrote: ok 42...so you think it's ok for councils to come out and ban the burqa in their particular area or have a stance in support or otherwise on gay marriage and so on?

Interesting you would choose those two particular contentious matters. The point I was making of course that Emperor Barnett presumes to prohibit councils from participating in political discussions. On that basis I presume you are on Emperor Barnett's side. It seems to come with the territory as another Liberal in the Lord Mayor of Perth that has led the ban on fellow councillors being able to speak to the press.

I wonder how long before Emperor Barnett talks about altenative facts Trump style.

Unlike in most of the eastern states who are openly political with Labour and Lib candidates. WA Councils by their charter are non political, prospective councillors nominate and promote themselves on the local council issues and what affects their rate payers (that's how it's supposed to be anyway). The only time they can get involved with so called political issues is quite narrow and only when dealing with issues created by state or federal governments that directly affect their rate payer constituency, such as Roe 8 directly affects Cockburn and Freo Councils. It's when you get wombats like the Freo mayor making divisive political decisions like the Oz day debacle which is not something that the Council should be involved in. If Pettit had said the Council simply cannot afford it then that's different but this muppet decided to go for a bit of self promotion and it blew right up in his smug left wing face.

Senior Seagull wrote: Unlike in most of the eastern states who are openly political with Labour and Lib candidates. WA Councils by their charter are non political, prospective councillors nominate and promote themselves on the local council issues and what affects their rate payers (that's how it's supposed to be anyway). The only time they can get involved with so called political issues is quite narrow and only when dealing with issues created by state or federal governments that directly affect their rate payer constituency, such as Roe 8 directly affects Cockburn and Freo Councils. It's when you get wombats like the Freo mayor making divisive political decisions like the Oz day debacle which is not something that the Council should be involved in. If Pettit had said the Council simply cannot afford it then that's different but this muppet decided to go for a bit of self promotion and it blew right up in his smug left wing face.

Who is the current MLA for Perth SS?

42 I could be wrong but I am starting to believe you are not much of a fan of Colin Barnett?

Just when I was losing faith in the political system, Colin Barnett came out today and promised a railway line. Where to doesn't really matter but he has now certainly put his faltering campaign back on track as the good people of Ellenbrook would fondly recall from the last election. Now we will forget all about the lead in the pipes, the bacteria in the water and Ned Flanders economic blueprint, re elect the Liberals and wait for our railway line.

swan42 wrote:

BC wrote: ok 42...so you think it's ok for councils to come out and ban the burqa in their particular area or have a stance in support or otherwise on gay marriage and so on?

Interesting you would choose those two particular contentious matters. The point I was making of course that Emperor Barnett presumes to prohibit councils from participating in political discussions. On that basis I presume you are on Emperor Barnett's side. It seems to come with the territory as another Liberal in the Lord Mayor of Perth that has led the ban on fellow councillors being able to speak to the press.

I wonder how long before Emperor Barnett talks about altenative facts Trump style.

42...the FCC has not entered a political discussion, it's unilaterally moved a national celebration to another day and completely rebadged it. no discussion entered into and it's the only council in Australia to do such a thing. Pettit needs to be reminded FCC is just that...a city council and not a vehicle for political commentary.

Grassy wrote: The Answer to the Above Question,is Yes,Again!

Disgraceful Act from the Premier yesterday,using the Distraught Memories of 3 Families to Attempt to Score Cheap,Nasty Political points to deflect his Failures on Law and Order and Another Broken Promise.

It could be argued that John Quigly stands accused of the same charge,though not on the same,lower than Snakes' Bellies the Premier Hissed out,in grandstanding with Don Spiers on 9,though it was mentioned this morning,that 9 Invited Quigly for the Joint Interview.

You Arrogant Sod,Premier!

PS - Roe 8 Protesters,Shut Your Cakeholes for 6 weeks!

Agreed, thats a pretty low blow.