Your insert on page two of Monday, April 28 edition only mentions part of my comment on the issue of the new style council agenda.

As I was asked for other comments on this issue I would have thought they would be published in full.

This issue was discussed by elected members at the February 18 meeting and I would therefore thought that this would have been seen by your reporters as an important issue.

We are opposed to the decision that questions to council have to be presented in a special form before the meeting, which is then left to the mayor to allow it be answered.

Why? Is it to ignore embarrassing questions?

Members of the public should be allowed to answer from the floor, isn't this what transparency means?

In the past when I have asked a number of questions I have stated that I am prepared to have the answers in writing.

In fact I welcome that.

I notice that since this new system was introduced, it is interesting to note that the public haven't used public question time.

The new system precludes accounts for payment to be viewed by the public in the agenda and also on request at the council office.

Public have every right to know how council spends our money, what have they to hide?

Also public attendance in the members gallery appears to have shrunk.

So much for council encouraging public involvement.

Council were very discreet in obtaining public comments for the new system, so successful in fact that I believe about 99 per cent never knew, a) there was a new system being on trial and b) there was a deadline.

So now council have extended the three month trial to 12 months, will there be a little bit more openess so that the public know what the new system is all about and to have a well advertised date for public reaction?

Perhaps the WCN would be a good idea, as it goes to all households council then couldn't be accused of lack of transparency.