Dear Reader, after attending last Thursday evening’s meet the candidates forum at Port Douglas Community Hall, I can find no better description for the 90-minute gab fest as unimpressive.

The question remains, I suppose,’do we expect better from those who would represent us? I think we do deserve better and I’ll try to elucidate why over the next few paragraphs.

RELATED:

• <link election-forum-heats-up-in-port-douglas.13559.0.html>Election forum heats up in Port-Douglas
• <link mayoral-and-councillor-candidates-respon.13558.0.html>Mayoral and Councillor Candidates respond to Q&A
• <link rate-rise-will-be-responsible-says-le.13556.0.html>Rate rise will be 'responsible', says Leu

I personally know six of the current 11 candidates for Councillor and two for Mayor for the upcoming March 19 Council Election, the successful five of whom will be responsible for discharging their duties and responsibilities until March 2020 – a four year term.

So, it’s always difficult to be completely objective when discussing the relative performances of each of the speakers (Eleven (11) for Councillor and two (2) for Mayor) during their introduction to the Douglas Community on Thursday night.

But, objective one must be. I’m reminded of the saying “Friends say good things about you behind your back, and bad things to your face.

Abigail Noli – current Councillor and Dep Mayor – was a little short on substantial achievements over the past two years upon which she was prepared to raise her colours ‘up the mast’ so to speak, but did rack up some community favourites 'Hot food at the markets' and 'Meteors Swim Club'.

Terry Melchert, as always, self serving but erudite in his address, which I found engaging and confronting. It’s what I expected from Terry – he was amongst the outstanding speakers on the night and left no one in any doubt as to what is his position on rates etc.

Peter McKeown, I know Peter, always honest, down to earth and a very decent human being. Although not as inspiring as some of the other speakers, Peter has extensive business background heading up one of Douglas' largest businesses. Unfortunately Peter had little to add to the debate but will garner significnt support at the Mossman booth.

Bruce Clarke – well, what’s there to say about Bruce? I assume from his presentation that he’s a really nice man – the old school would regard Bruce as a ‘gentleman’ and I take my hat off to him for that.  As far as a presence in a Council showdown, I’d love to see some forthrightness and hear some volume and anger.

Michael Kerr – now, here’s a candidate who stands for something. Despite the presence of his nemesis in the front row of the audience, doing his best to unnerve, Michael was the shining light amongst the 12 speakers on Thursday night. Michael not only stands for something, he actually told the audience WHAT those ‘somethings’ were. Must surely be a stand out contender.

Donna Graham – I’ve never met Ms Graham, but if her address to the audience on Thursday is anything to go by, her credentials alone are not what she rests on. She appears to be across a whole raft of issues affecting Douglas in the immediate and short-to long-term future; the Marina Redevelopment; the Sheraton upgrade; innovation to expand local employment; her view of a ‘clean and green’ Douglas Shire with a particular emphasis on recycling. She proved that she’s a wonderful public speaker, balanced and forthright.

Roy Zammataro – now Roy’s apparently done wonderful community work in the Shire over a long period of time, and has worked in industries which range from management of supermarkets to digging trenches as a plumber. As befits the strong European influence and population in the Douglas Shire, and their collective involvement in the trades and sugar farming, he proved himself a passionate speaker and put me in mind of several of the people from similar backgrounds during the de-amalgamation ‘dispute’.

Vivienne Ruffles – diminutive, quietly spoken, I got the impression that Ms Ruffles had so much more to say, but didn’t clearly articulate what she wanted to say, what her vision for the future was and where she stood on rates, general finance, etc.

Paul Snelgrove – now people have said to me since Thursday’s get-together that “he’s a lawyer, and yet he admits to not being a very good public speaker”. Well, I have sufficient experience arguing in Courts of Law against many a lawyer whose articulation of a point of view was well-below Paul’s. That said, I’d be suggesting that Paul join Peter as audience at council meetings before another tilt in the future.

David Carey – with his depth of experience across public service, at local Government, police management and accounting, one would expect David Carey to speak with some authority and clarity on the issues at hand. And that’s precisely what he did. Carey’s the exemplar of how a Councillor/Mayor ought to both be across the facts and have the ability to tell the story.

Julia Leu – I make no apology for being on the wrong side of history (as we so far know it) in opposing Julia’s view on de-amalgamation. I make no apology for my open promotion of another candidate for Mayor at the 2013 Council election. All that said, Julie IS the incumbent Mayor, and appears to enjoy solid support, at least in Port Douglas. I don’t get that, as a former CEO, and as Mayor of over two years’ standing, Julia is unable to present a case for re-election without reading from notes – not referring to dot points – reading.

Roy Weavers - Roy has developed a profile in Douglas over the past five years given his involvement with The Newsport – Douglas’ own on line news source, as well as with the Carnivale. He made the point that his job as a journo has been to ‘receive, assess and disseminate’ loads of information as quickly, cleanly and accurately as possible in as short a time frame as possible.  But Roy, too, read his presentation to Thursday’s audience rather than ad-libbed his position. That said, Roy DID envision a future where a myriad of stakeholders would be brought together with Council to ensure the smartest and best ideas are brought to the table.

Which leaves me with three other issues to comment upon.

Phil Holloway – convenor; I’ve worked with Phil (until three weeks ago) and so I have a pretty good angle on his political and social views.

Martin Tranter – moderator; I’ve never met Marty as his army of followers seem to know him.But how both these speakers – supposedly doing nothing but bringing a meeting to fruition in an unbiased manner – can make ‘speeches from the panel’ supportive of the current Mayor and Councillors is, frankly, beyond me.

The Audience – you know you’re in a room of Julia Leu disciples when you hear wolf whistles (and worse) when she stands to speak, and when she finishes; you know you’re definitely in that room when the same disciples interject, talk whilst the ‘other candidate’ is addressing the forum, and so on.

As an aside, I found one thing strange.  When I rolled up at around 5.20 p.m. on Thursday night, I noticed that the first six seats on the right of the auditorium (as facing the speakers) were ‘reserved’ with handbags and other paraphernalia.  Yet, the persons who eventually took those seats were nowhere to be seen. I find that strange. I’d say naive, I’d even say childish if I wasn’t prone to using those terms to describe Julia disciples.