By JOHN VAN KLAVEREN
G21 GEELONG Alliance board director Barbara Abley has hit out at “unfounded” and “false” attacks on the organisation.
In a letter to fellow directors, Ms Abley said the latest attacks were unchanged from previous years.
“The perennial attacks on the role and objectives of G21 haven’t altered over the years. No surprises in content nor thrust, and much of it unfounded and not factual,” she said.
The region’s five councils fund G21 to work on strategic regional planning and development. Geelong’s council provides the lion’s share – $400,000 a year.
Geelong councillors Bruce Harwood and Tony Ansett have have publicly questioned G21’s value, while Liberal Member for Western Victoria has said ratepayers receive litle return on their investment.
Ms Abley said the criticisms revolved around G21’s independence, the size of Geelong’s contribution and perceptions of inadequate representation and accountability.
Ms Abley said G21 formed in 2002 out of a “unanimous desire” of Geelong councillors to form a regional body to “robustly” fight for state and federal funding.
G21 aimed to “present a united front” on behalf of all constituents, she said.
“Local government partners willingly committed proportional funds, time and manpower, ensuring the organisation had wide community and business representation and buy in.”
Ms Abley denied that Geelong’s council carried the financial burden for G21.
“No council has been expected to contribute disproportionally to the size of its population, budget or rate base.”
Borough of Queenscliffe councillor Bob Merriman said state and federal governments, prime ministers, premiers and opposition leaders encouraged G21.
“They all welcome the way we work through G21 and promote it as a role model to other regions. All the Regional Development Australia applications go through G21 and are given priority.”
Cr Merriman said “self-serving groups” wanted to destroy G21.
Chair Ed Coppe said G21 was meeting its purpose.
“I’ve been chair for six years and from time to time various councillors have raised questions about the funding, the focus, or decisions made.
“It’s perfectly legitimate for councillors to ask whether that’s the best way to spend $400,000. We shouldn’t automatically get a tick every year.
“It’s right and proper to account for what we do.”
