I suppose municipal councillor Bryan Raiser knew what was in store when he started pushing for salary increases for mayor and council, but knowing it and having illogical attacks made on your person are two quite different things.
Politicians are easy targets. They can't always say exactly as they feel in unambiguous language. They have to be, well, political.
That's why columnists love them. It's always an easy debate when your opponent can't really fight back.
But some of the arguments levelled against councillors Raiser and Patricia Heintzman in last week's letter page verged on the absurd.
One writer asked if salary should be a consideration when running for office. It seems so self-evident that I don't think I need to say it, but of course it is.
Isn't salary an issue any time we take work?
I wouldn't do my job for $17,000, and I wouldn't run for municipal politics at the wage grade. You can't live on that wage, and you can't do the job expected of our councillors if you work full time.
People have mortgages, bills, children, expenses. Is it wrong for them to want to earn enough to pay some of those things?
I think it's ridiculous that the mayor of 老澳门六合彩开奖记录资料 earns about 40 per cent of my salary. And I get two months off each summer and a pension with my job. Either I'm grossly overpaid, or something is wrong on that front.
I know that Mayor Greg Gardner spends more hours doing his work than I do on my job. I know too that the decisions he makes are more high stakes than those I make in my work.
Another writer argued that Heintzman and Raiser do not have regular jobs (whatever they are) and suggested they ought to go out and get one if they want more money.
And so the question is begged: "What the hell does that have to do with anything?"
The issue here isn't Raiser, Heintzman, Lonsdale or Gardner, the issue is what is appropriate remuneration for these people doing this important work for our community?
Increasingly we expect them to be on-call all the time. We want them to have in-depth knowledge of complex issues social economic, environmental, etc. And yet we don't want to pay them to do it?
It's not surprising that our last several councils have been made up of the wealthy, the retired and the self employed (i.e. those people without "regular" jobs).
Is that what we want. Don't we need a cross-section of the population so that a variety of voices are heard?
It's too easy to sit on the side and criticize these people for trying to find a way for municipal politics to be more inclusive.
In defence of Coun. Raiser, he was absolutely up front about this issue throughout the campaign. People who voted for him should have known that he was going to be pushing it. And it is an important discussion to have.
The barriers created by the low remuneration and the long hours required to do the job of municipal councillor are real. I'm glad that council is taking it on.
