From the desk of ROLAND ROCCHICCIOLI

THERE is much wisdom in knowing when to speak-up and when to employ a stoney silence; equally, it is imperative in life to “pick-your-battles” — to know which should be fought, and those which should be ignored. Neither conundrum is simple, but both need to be mastered!

Also, there is a gaping chasm between trivial carping and measured argument. In public office, openly debating matters which are a personal irritant, but do not, by definition, affect the broader community, is carping; subject matter engaging and affecting the entire community is more correctly classified as essential debate.

Ballarat City Councillors using a council meeting to posit the Australian Electoral Commission’s tardiness in satisfying winning declaration protocols caused “stress” to the quivering candidates is brazen cockalorum! Let us not conflate issues: arguably, the system would benefit from the implementation of an improved counting process; however, to claim the required delay in result announcements caused “stress” is so profoundly ridiculous — so hubristic, it is risible!

Stress is waiting for cancer test results and being told to put your affairs-in-order; stress is being a farmer; stress is homelessness — having no place for you and your children to live, or to sleep tonight; stress is not having the funds to provide food for your children; stress is the inability to pay for dental/medical treatment — together with a litany of societal challenges which, apparently, we are impotent to eradicate.

Waiting to learn your fate in local council elections may be irritating, time-consuming, and even generate nervous eagerness; however, it is not, by any reasonable standard of rational, academic reckoning, “stress”. The temerity to advance the dubious proposition is outrageous and whiffs of an over-inflated opinion — self-aggrandisement running rampant. To have a statutory body, public meeting so blatantly bastardised begs the communal questions: Why would something so frivolous be proffered in the chamber? Who do you think you are? It demonstrates a decided lack of propriety.

Electoral incumbency does not, by unwritten convention, grant a platform to champion personal ideologies and spurious theories. Absolutely, categorically, and resoundingly, there is no place for medical conspiracy conjecture. Without supporting empirical, scientific evidence the competing argument has no basis in truth and should be viewed distrustingly — even rejected, wholeheartedly. Having been gifted a vote, incumbents have a moral and ethical obligation to serve the greater public will — even in the event of jarring, personal, philosophical conflict. Electoral success is not an opportunity to “have your say”! Council is not a mini-parliament. While it could be hypothesised the system is imperfect in the 21st-century, its specific raison d’etre endures: to provide a facility for resolving local issues; to entreat state and federal governments to achieve communal consequences; and generally to provide a permanent service structure — financial and otherwise, for the efficient running of the city, and its amenities. Local governance is not law-making, nor is it a fiefdom.

“Pride goes before destruction, a haughty spirit before a fall”. We are none of us indispensable, and none has a greater pre-eminence. History echoes the perils of affectation and aspirational attitudinising. Candidates are not dragged, kicking and screaming, to run for office. It is a personal choice — and if you can’t stand the heat…

Meanwhile — serious, multifarious challenges need attention — so, please — with respect — do shut-up, and stop being so bloody precious!

Roland can be heard with Brett Macdonald radio 3BA — Monday 10.40am. Contact: [email protected]