Shire of York

Shire of York

Tuesday 21 April 2015

Graeme Simpson invokes legal doctrine of Reasonable Person to rule out possibility of Shire chicanery

‘No attempt to falsify public records,’ he says

In Notes from Underground 6, I cited evidence that in December 2012 the York Shire Council had falsified the minutes of the November 2012 Council meeting. 

It had done so by substituting ‘Balladong Farm’ for ‘vexatious residents’ as the main topic of a meeting with Ms Elisabeth Stevenson of the Shire’s lawyers, McLeods. CEO Hooper, DCEO Cochrane, and Crs Tony Boyle and Roy Scott  (listed here in order of importance) attended the meeting. 

According to credit card records, the meeting with Ms Stevenson was followed by a ratepayer-funded luncheon (including alcoholic beverages) at the 7th Avenue Bar and Restaurant in Midland, and a little later by icecreams for the CEO and DCEO in Mundaring.  The full cost of those refreshments was allocated ingeniously to ‘Training and Conference’ expenses.

DCEO Cochrane later tried to persuade Ms Stevenson that the meeting had been not about ‘vexatious residents’ but about ‘Balladong Farm’. This would have brought Ms Stevenson’s recollection into line with the falsified minutes.  Ms Stevenson politely declined to cooperate in this Orwellian revising of the past.

Acting CEO Graeme Simpson has since described DCEO Cochrane as ‘an exemplary employee.’  

‘A well settled Rule of Law’

In November 2012, CEO Hooper, accompanied by Crs Boyle and Scott, repeated the pattern by meeting with David Morris of the DLGC in Perth to discuss ‘a vexatious ratepayer,’ then swanning off to Midland for another ratepayer-funded nosh-up and gargle in the same dining establishment as before.

This time, even more ingeniously, luncheon expenses were allocated to a conference in Perth that had concluded eleven days before the meeting with Mr. Morris took place.

Questioned about this odd fact by one of the usual ‘passionate extremist’ suspects, Acting CEO Simpson described it as ‘a not uncommon error’ arising from having to deal with ‘repetitive data entries.’

Then, donning wig and gown, sticking his thumbs in his waistcoat pockets and puffing out his cheeks, Acting CEO Simpson delivered the following sonorous judgement:

The Reasonable Person principle is a well settled Rule of Law that is clear and does not need to be proved. In my opinion there has not been any attempt by Mr Ray Hooper or others to falsify public records or change the allocation costs in the Shire record. The costs have been allocated to the correct account but the function identified incorrectly.

I’m not quite sure what the Reasonable Person is doing here.  I think Mr. Simpson is arguing that since no reasonable person would interpret the facts of the case as an indication that public records had been falsified, he doesn’t have to justify his opinion: res ipsa loquitur, as the lawyers say.   

Honestly, I think he’s talking through his hat.

Mr. Simpson seems to have thrown in the Reasonable Person (aka ‘the man on the Clapham omnibus’, in Australia ‘the man on the Bondi tram’) ostensibly to demonstrate his profound knowledge of law but actually to bamboozle the enquirer.  Using a bit of fake legal erudition or unusual words like ‘acolyte’ was a favourite technique of former CEO Hooper’s for keeping councillors as well as ratepayers firmly at heel.

Anyway, back to the November 2012 minutes.  Faced with the evidence, you’d have to be pretty dense or pretty desperate to deny that they were falsified at the Council meeting in December 2012.

There is no reason for Mr. Simpson to be desperate.  He was not a party to the crime.  But this is what he wrote to a friend of mine last week, after my Notes had laid bare the facts for the whole world to see:

I have checked on the Minutes of the Council meeting of 19 May 2014 and I am of the view that no reasonable thinking person could come to a conclusion that anybody has attempted to falsify a public record.

Is he trying to convince us he’s an idiot? Or is he just a true-blue Aussie team player doing the right thing by his mates? 

The verdict is yours.



By James Plumridge, our Crime and Corruption Correspondent, reporting from New Baghdad


22 comments:

  1. James. the man is clearly an idiot.
    Is he now saying that Elisabeth Stevenson got it wrong in her advice to Council and that McLeods accounting department got it wrong raising an invoice with the wrong terminology.
    Clearly we've been landed with a moron of a CEO.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Well Mr Simpson, the problem you have is that we are the reasonable person, you are dribbling bullshit and your explanation is rejected out of hand.

    But it does raise the question of why you took that action when commonsense shows the opposite to be true. So, were you acting alone, and if not, who was directing you?

    Your problem is that in the absence of evidence to the contrary, you are solely responsible.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Does Mr. G. Simpson have Law credentials or has he found Ray Hooper's CEO Handbook of Useful Terms?

    May have mislead people
    Not an uncommon error
    Any reasonable thinking person.

    Can't wait for - 'this is the end of the matter' and 'vexatious Ratepayers' !



    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Surely, this blog now has enough evidence of skullduggery (not sure of the spelling) to hand everything over to an investigate journalist that could blow this whole saga wide open... you need a bigger, louder, more inquisitive audience than what currently exists... you need some main stream, media attached to these atrocities that have occurred and seemingly look like continuing to occur!

      Delete
    2. Yes, you're right. Trouble is, nobody seems interested. I suppose the media have bigger fish to fry, like the Duchess of Cambridge, Kim Kardashian, Islamic State and Colin's Bigger Picture.

      You might be surprised to know how large and widespread our audience is. It even extends to staff in the Premier's Department. I think statewide media have been instructed to ignore us. Who gives a damn about York? We're only good enough to house Perth's rubbish so far as the metro mob is concerned.

      If you have connections in the world of investigative journalism, feel free to invite them to the historic town and shire of York.

      Delete
  4. Perhaps today is a good time to remind those in positions of power and public duty in government circles that our ANZAC tradition is based on the principle of free speech, and that government in our country would be based on service to the people, diligence and honesty. It will be interesting to see how the "dignataries" dance around those concepts in public tomorrow.

    This blog should be recognised publicly as providing that freedom of speech against tyranny.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Thank you Anonymous, you are absolutely correct.

    From this moment on I think we should all refrain from including the term 'position of power' when I referring to the senior staff in the Shire of York and the DLG.

    They have lost the right to our respect.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Instead of telling us the truth about past misdemeanours, what the Shire and DLGC want to do is conceal their habitual (as well as historical) dishonesty, incompetence and corruption. Sadly, there are some very good people working for the Shire; I imagine the same is true for the DLGC. But they don't seem to be the ones wielding the power.

      If some of the mugwumps who do wield power had their way, this blog would be shut down. Apparently, according to one Shire worker, it is currently being 'investigated' (whatever that means).

      Delete
  6. As I've said before, James (whichever is listening): Freedom of Speech, dealing with the past by debriefing but also by officialdom admitting errors and doing something to fix them up, AS WELL AS doing what we can to work towards a better future for York and all of its citizens, are totally consistent strands of the job that needs to be done.

    The Blog is one valid avenue of expression and of bringing good and bad to light, and the second valid avenue for improving York's situation can involve a strand that includes writing to those who can help (if only they can see the point), groups — even the dreaded Advisory Groups — thinking about and sharing with the Council (at present read JB for 'Council') ideas and plans for how we can make improvements for the future (some of which will be undoing damage done, and some of which will be innovations, people working together on things that need doing, etc..)

    On the subject of potential mugwumps, James (again, whichever of you is listening), shutting the Blog down would backfire; and secondly, they couldn't shut the Blog down unless it did something corrupt (oh my, and that's an assumption!), or they shot (or otherwise disposed of) the 'culprits'. Imagine them systematically going after all suspects in a session evocative of Midsomer Murders! I suppose it would be titilating news for Perth Central to enjoy, though.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Fear not, only the Blogmaster is able to shut down the blog, even if it does something corrupt, as you put it. I don't think he or she wants to do that. My feeling is that he (or she) intends to continue it well into the next decade. Once the Shire of York is sorted out, the Blogmaster will probably enlarge the scope of the Blog to include closer scrutiny of the DLGC and perhaps other government departments whose staff deem it right and proper without justification to subvert and frustrate the norms of democracy.

      Delete
  7. James - I agree with the comment above about not using the term 'position of power' can we begin referring to those mugwump people as 'the weak links in our democracy', because that is exactly what they.
    Lets not given them any credence of having any power over us.

    ReplyDelete
  8. This business of 'reasonable thinking person' is grating on me. Graeme Simpson is in NO position to judge who is reasonable and who is not. He is bureaucratically bias, politically perverted and as dull as dishwater. Here's hoping our new CEO has a spark of enthusiasm.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What concerns me at the moment is how the new CEO will be appointed and by whom. We don't want a corporate psychopath trained and experienced in the dark arts of obfuscation and concealment, or a lumbering dinosaur obsessed with the idea that the less the community knows about how its money is spent, the better.

      Our best bet would be to look outside the charmed circle of local government CEOs, soaked for decades as many of them seem to be in a bureaucratic culture of treating the public (and its elected representatives) with contempt, for a young, intelligent person with legal, accounting or business qualifications. We need to make sure that the appointee understands relevant legislation - not only the LG Act and regulations but also the FOI Act! - and is temperamentally and intellectually committed to open, honest and accountable government. In short, someone willing to work with and for the community, not against it, behind its back or in spite of its wishes.

      We also need councillors who are not pompous, ignorant, self-important buffoons timidly subservient to the Shire administration - but that's another story.

      Feel free to adopt this vision of mine, Mr Best. I think you'll find that the great majority of York's citizens would welcome its implementation as reality.

      Delete
  9. Mr. Best told us Mr. Simpson will stay on until October to give our Council time. after they return in July, to appoint a new CEO - he would not have misled us on this would he?

    It appears the Local Government runs a recycling shop for ageing CEO's and we finish up with the same mind set. It is a closed shop mentality and has to stop.

    It is time for a new wave of CEO's to come in to keep up with the changing times.

    Ray Hooper claimed a five year contract was essential to guarantee continuity. We sure had that didn't we, continuity of hell!

    If a CEO is doing a good job, his/her contract will be renewed annually, simple as that.

    Perhaps we should try a Female CEO. Bet there aren't too many of them in the system. Why not give it a go.



    ReplyDelete
  10. Yes, why not a woman? Let's advertise and interview - and may the best and most suitably qualified person win.

    We may have to advertise for a deputy CEO as well.

    Annual review of contracts seems like a good idea.

    ReplyDelete
  11. A reasonable man26 April 2015 at 15:06


    After reading Underground 6 (falsifying public record), I checked the minutes for the OCM May 2014, then checked the minutes for the December 2012 and November 2012 OCM's.
    Which part of the crime does Simpson not understand?
    Dr Plumrigde, if you have the copies of the legal advice can they by posted?

    ReplyDelete
  12. Yes, I have a copy of Tyshscha's email to Elisabeth Stevenson and of Ms Stevenson's response. Ms Stevenson discloses in some detail the matters discussed at the meeting in Claremont and the advice given.

    It could be posted if the Blogmaster agrees.

    By the way, we're lucky to have the email (and a good deal else) because under the FOI Act, as legal advice, it would be exempt from disclosure.

    ReplyDelete
  13. There are many honest and caring people within the Shire Administration and they want the tyranny to stop.

    Weak links in our democracy have bubbled to the top within the Administration and the majority of Staff want changes to be made at the Senior Staff level including replacing the DCEO.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies

    1. I know this blog has supporters who work for the Shire. Don't worry, friends, change is on its way. When the time comes, we'll be relying on you to help set matters straight. Honest and caring people will always be in demand. Others might like to consider seeking a future elsewhere.

      Delete
  14. T. Cochranes email to Ms. Stevenson is proof she is one of the major 'weak links in our democracy'.

    Time she 'altered' her application for leave to read 'resignation'.

    ReplyDelete
  15. It was on TV the other evening, Business's with more Women on their boards are more successful.

    Male CEO's have had their chance here. A female CEO and a male D/CEO would be good to try. I am sure somewhere out there in Australia there are two people just waiting for the opportunity to prove there is such as thing as honest, open and accountable Local Government.

    Twelve month contracts have my vote.

    ReplyDelete