NEWS DESK
Visa delays see mayor miss China trade trip
GRAHAM Pittock
MORNINGTON Peninsula mayor Cr Graham Pittock abandoned a trade mission to China last month after it became too hard to arrange a visa. Cr Pittock said the shire “lost” $1500 on flight bookings in the exercise after he was invited to speak at an event being organised by the China-based Australian International Trade Association. “It [the trip] was cancelled because I became too busy,” Cr Pittock said. He said the eight to 10-day visit to China would have given the shire “experience of doing business with internationally”. Cr Pittock said he had been approached by the AITA and was now considering attending another of the association’s events in June.
He said it had taken three days to get a visa “because of my incompetence and lack of experience”. While in China he had planned to speak about the Mornington Peninsula. “We need to learn how they do business in China.” If Cr Pittock had gone to China it would have been his second overseas trip since being elected mayor in November 2015. The shire paid for Cr Pittock, Cr Hugh Fraser and the shire’s then renewable resources team leader Jessica Wingad to attend last year’s United Nations’ climate change conference in Paris. Asked on 6 April for details of the mayor’s planned trip to China, the shire’s communications and media manager Mark Kestigian
replied: “There is no formal response to the trip overseas as it did not eventuate and to the best of my knowledge, cost the shire nothing.” A 2007 investigative report by Bill Birnbauer in The Sunday Age listed complaints by some Australians about the AITA’s handling of work visas within China and the adverse reactions of some Australian politicians about links the organisation claimed to have with them. Among those mentioned by the AITA on its website is former Victorian Speaker and MP for Bass Ken Smith, a regular visitor to China. Mr Smith was a councillor and shire president with the former Shire of Hastings. Keith Platt
Survey looks to the peninsula of 2030 COMMUNITY advocacy organisation Peninsula Speaks wants to find out why residents find the Mornington Peninsula so appealing. The question about the attraction of the peninsula is part of an online survey the group hopes will help guide future planning. Results of the survey will be independently managed and analysed before the findings are sent to all three levels of government – federal, state and local. The group believes having at least 3000 respondents will produce results that adequately reflect community views. Follow-up surveys would be conducted using a database of people who participate in the first survey. Group co-founder Peter Avery said Peninsula Speaks wants to “gain the widest possible range of views about the Mornington Peninsula, both now and how it could be by 2030”. Answers to the survey would “identify the key priorities for the future and help inform and guide the key decision makers on the peninsula”. The question about what makes the living on the peninsula “special” is one of 20 in the survey. The question suggest 19 reasons and asks survey participants to number some or all of them in order of preference. To register for the Peninsula Speaks online survey about the peninsula’s future go to info@peninsulaspeaks.org.au
Poll process documented THE voting process Tacit Approval was not used in the Capel Sound name change poll. Council officers had sought permission from the Office of Geographic Names to analyse the results based on ‘YES’, ‘NO’ and ‘No response received’ – and therefore not include tacit approval on non-returned forms. The registrar decided that the process – where a non-returned form signifies approval – would “not be appropriate given the potential impact on survey results”. It provided an exemption for council to exclude it. Name change proponent Terry Wright said poll letters sent to residents and ratepayers “did not mention this change to the normal convention”. “That’s why many people assumed that, if they supported the change, they didn’t need to vote – and we found it necessary to take many actions to redress this misunderstanding,” he said. Of the 5600 letters sent out, 1065 were returned supporting the name change and 837 were against – a majority of 228. About two-thirds of the letters were not returned. The favourable poll result was supported by councillors 7:4 at the Monday 11 April meeting. The shire is sending letters to residents and ratepayers advising of the result, and advising the Registrar of Geographic Place Names. A decision will be made within 30 days. Stephen Taylor
PAGE 8
Southern Peninsula News 3 May 2016