Thursday, March 05, 2009

Never ending greed in the name of “helping the community”!

Before we wake up from the news about the greedy Green hubby who eats all the food at council meeting, we discover more “Green” greed. This time it happens in Auburn council.

We noted earlier the sacred alliance formed behind closed doors between the highly regressive Liberal – Unity parties and the “progressive” Greens party. During the election campaign the main slogan of the Greens candidates was “community needs, not developers greed”. After the ballot papers count was over, the “community needs defender” put her hands with the “greedy developers”. The full details of the deal are still unknown to all of us.

The “community needs” defender is ignoring the fact that Auburn council is going through very difficult financial times with an expected $5 millions deficit. The Greens councilor in Auburn is also disregarding the “community needs” of spending on infrastructure to both create local jobs and raise the life-style of mainly marginalised new-migrants, refugees and poor people of Auburn.

The Greens councilor this time is demanding a pay-rise to herself and her Liberal-Unity alliance, to around double the allowance they are getting from the council at the moment.

We did not expect less from the Liberals-Unity mainly developers councilors. But when it comes to the Greens councilor, we should ask 5 million questions:
1- How many community projects would this rise in councilors allowance cancel?
2- How many local jobs will it cost the community?
3- How could this help with “defending the community needs”?
4- Who are the real “greedies” that we need a representative to protect the community from?
5- Why has the Greens councilor, who believes in public “accountability” and “transparency” not made this pay-rise an election promise or called for a referendum on it?
6- What is the difference between the Liberals and the Greens, after all these deals? Would they consider merging very soon?

It is very clear that the Greens councilor is planning well for her retirement. And she wants a very comfortable retirement.

But what happened to the “alternative voice” which the Greens were deafening our ears with in the last 2 decades? Maybe the right question would be: alternative of what and who?

It is very clear that it is an alternative in the kind of Greed, only. Or maybe it is an alternative in the rhetoric and the type of lies and deception.

What kind of Australia are we dreaming of, when the “alternative” is planning a comfortable retirement, while the debt on citizens is at its highest.

And what kind of “alternative” is demanding a pay-rise, while there is a freeze on any pay-rise for all workers and battlers?

The other question here is: if the Greens councilor thinks that running for council is not to help the community for better planning and governing and it should be just to secure people’s retirement, why did she run again last September. If she thinks that the pay is no good, why did she choose to run for “exploitation”?

All these questions are for the ordinary Australians to think about to enable them to make a very “informed” choice next time we go to polls. And at that time, the Greens should know that we had enough “greedy” people in the government and what is lacking in Australian politics is a real alternative: an alternative that feels with embattled marginalised people.

If the Greens want to help me by increasing my debt and reducing public services and projects, I would rather stick to the ordinary “greedies”. I prefer “Greedies that I know” over “greedies I need to know”.

What makes me feel bad this time is the fact that the same Greens councilor in Auburn was crying foul when she failed to be elected as Mayor earlier this year. She accused her opponents of being “racists” and “anti-Muslims” and distributed foul accusations to everyone who did not vote for her. She wanted to convince us that she is running to represent Muslim “needs” and “issues”. But this week we discovered that she was indeed after pay-rise from $20,000 (Councilor’s allowance) to $50,000 (Mayor’s allowance).

As Muslim Auburn citizen, I say that she does not represent me and my needs.
And for this and for everything else I say: we are sorry to Auburn residents.

1 comment:

Shell said...

Why don't you stop being a sore loser Jamal it a sign of bad character.

There was no pay rise anyway , it was a procedural matter of confirming the band we are in and even if there was so what I earn $280 dollars a week to be abused by morons like you.

I could do much better in my learned profession as a lawyer and lets not forget you where the one who originally asked nme to run !

So why are you bagging me now. "It would be good to have a scarved lady in politics " you said - what have you decided it would not be good anymore ?