A correpondent's views on Dr Reynold Macpherson's election performance are not justified by the facts, says a reader. Photo/File
John Pakes (Letters, February 20) offers four opinions not justified by the facts, in my view.
He refers to Dr Reynold Macpherson as a "failed mayoral candidate" when he was actually the runner-up. He reduced the winner's vote by 22.7 per cent to a margin of 7 per cent.
He
increased his own vote from when he stood as a councillor by 26.2 per cent. Another "failure" like that and he will be the mayor!
He claimed that Crs Bentley and Kumar were elected in their own right and that the four other RDRR-endorsed candidates failed. The facts are that they campaigned as a team while retaining their individuality, and all came within 1000 votes of being elected. All but one of the mayor's power bloc suffered 22-30 per cent negative swings. Another "failure" like that and the RDRR will win power!
He rejects the RDRR being respected as "key stakeholders" because their endorsed candidates attracted only 41,397 votes out of the 167,081 cast. "Stakeholders" are defined as those who can affect or be affected by the organisation's actions, objectives and policies. If the RDRR can attract 24.8 per cent of votes, and come so close to winning power at first try, then surely they warrant respect as "key stakeholders".
