I have several questions of the five Councillors who want to ‘test the market’ and the two absentee Councillors.

At the ‘Meet the Candidates’ sessions in Harden and Young not one candidate publicly said, if elected, they intended to go to market for the GM’s position. So how is it that you are representing the voice of your electorate on this one?

One of the candidates, now an elected Councillor, stated that he was promoting a ‘de-merge’ ticket at the 2019 State Election.

Is this an attempt to pull the amalgamated Council down, to destabilise it, to undermine progress to make a case for de-merging?

The work that the current GM did during the interim period was outstanding and, might I add, he did this in the face of unfounded public attempts to undermine him and the Administrator by at least two of the current elected Councillors.

Who among you could have achieved what the GM achieved at such a contentious time?

I am currently working in other regional amalgamated Council LGAs and constantly receive comments about how advanced and progressive Hilltops Council is and how it is making the most of the opportunities available.

In my work, I interact with several parliamentarians and they all comment on the Hilltops GM’s vision and capabilities.

With another $4.2 billion flagged to be spent on regional infrastructure I think you have just shot yourselves in the foot.  

I compare the current GMs capabilities with many I work with at a senior level in State Government Departments around Australia - he could hold a candle to any of them.

No doubt he knows that and will take his energy, vision and commitment elsewhere. He could have easily made that decision at the time of amalgamation, but he didn’t.

Why didn’t he? I believe because he was truly committed to Hilltops and creating a vision for this region.  

Perhaps he naively hoped that elected Councillors, who espouse a can-do attitude and preach progress for Hilltops, meant what they said?

As a result of the GM’s work during the interim period, you were handed a gift when elected.

I believe this decision reflects badly on the five elected Councillors and two absentee Councillors, not the GM.

'This was a commercial decision to test the market to see if we have the best general manager possible.’ Greg Armstrong.  

How could you make such a momentous decision without research?  

How could you take the risk of losing one of the best General Manager’s in the State who is young, has a young family and calls Hilltops home?

What astute business person would risk losing what they have simply to test if there is something better available?  

There are many other risk averse ways to see if you have the best General Manager possible.

I understand there have been few if any applications for the advertised Project Manager position.

So how are you going to achieve what has to be achieved with the numerous projects underway?

On what basis did you think that people of high calibre will be knocking at your door to apply for the GMs position when you have just given one of the State’s best young GMs a vote of no confidence?

Did you canvas the opinion of those who know the range of General Managers and the up and coming local government administrators - did you do the research?

If you had done the background research and analysed the potential consequences of your decision, a wise Council would have voted to extend the GM's contract.

Or was the decision based on a set of personal whims?

It’s very, very hard to believe that “There was no malice in the decision and any suggestion that this was a get-square by certain members of the council is irresponsible and unfounded – Greg Armstrong”. 

If you haven’t done the research how can you convince us it was not a personal decision?

I, along with many others I know and work with, in the Harden and Young communities, had great hope for the new Council.

With this decision that hope evaporates and the exciting, inspiring vision for the Hilltops region dries up too.

 Julia Atkin

​Beggan Beggan