WESTWARD HO
(Originally a novel by Charles
Kingsley)
He who, in his own best interest, should consider it ‘Best ‘ to remain
nameless will soon be setting sail westward. Maybe this will be back to become
a permanent, pre-next election fixture at the bottom of Tony Simpson’s local government rose garden as a living memorial
to the Shire of York Council’s folly in daring to question a Minister of the
Crown- while still in office .
Or maybe not- he may have some ‘Town of East Fremantle 2029 Needs Analysis’ to
vision for a fat- fee.
Then again according to Roel Loopers, the author of the online publication Freo’s
View, he could have some allegedly poorly finished business with the City of
Fremantle to re-attend to- or try to ignore.
Mr. Loopers claims, and I quote from Freo’s View, Mr. Best’s recent $80,000
visioning report for the port city was not worth the paper it was printed on.
Mr. Loopers alleges it is a lazy, plain, uninspiring summary of poorly attended
workshops- and queries whether anyone researched if the consultant (Mr. Best) has
the academic knowledge to analyse community issues? (That is Mr. Loopers publically
stated opinion which he should be perfectly entitled to.)
In York’s case this opinion is immaterial, as long as the Minister for Local
Government and Communities, Tony Simpson, thinks Mr. Best is the best- that is
all that matters.( And the so –called Shire of York’s ‘Official Unofficial’ online publication
should not have any adverse opinion that it is perfectly entitled to.)
What is the difference you ask? The Shire of York was audacious enough to question
the lack of credibility of a Government Minister and his staff, Mr. Loopers
only questioned the credibility of someone who had, at that stage, just been
employed as Shire of York commissioner by Minister Simpson.
So what has Mr. Best done for York that Mr. Loopers considers could have been
done by an Administrative Assistant acting on behalf of the City of Fremantle.
Only those who, possibly, in their own self- interest, have attended Mr. Best’s
visionary workshop séances would know.
How many in York attended these workshops is debatable. Mr. Loopers claims the
number of people attending Mr. Best’s Fremantle workshops may have been grossly
exaggerated. The numerical methodology apparently being used is - if the same
10 people attend 10 workshops then 100 people rocked up to be visionary
inspired.
So what are Mr. Best’s recent activities, initiatives and key strategic
activities for and on behalf of the York community?
One is to purchase a gutted property, being Lot 800, 801 South Street York for
$625,000 from Nola and Dick Bliss, part of which will be used as a carpark. This
property has allegedly been on the market for two years and has been purchased
by Mr. Best for, arguably, well above market value.
(In the 1980’s, Alan Bond, purchased Channel 9 from Kerry Packer for over twice
its market value. This was the penultimate financial blunder that sent his
business empire crashing down around his ears.)
If you look at Mr. Best’s budgetary measures adopted by himself at a Council
Meeting on June 26, 2015, for the 2015-16- Financial Year, nearly $500,000 has
been removed from local road maintenance while an additional $562,000 has been
dug-up for recreation facilities. It means an extra $947,000 in this year’s
budget has been set aside for recreation while local farmers bounce along
through the potholes.
This basically means that after a farmer hits a huge pothole in a Shire
maintained road, he can have a beer to calm his shattered nerves at the YRCC
Tavern or The York Palace Hotel. That is if their bars are open and he survived
the impact and allowed to drink on his medication.
So are the people in York who know Mr. Best- best- those who are accused of
employing Visa-less workers and have no shire planning approval for some of the
structures on their properties, or are they the normal, genuine, hard- working
country folk who have their towns best interest at heart?
Only Mr. Best can answer that question and, at the end, he may well have to.
So what is the definition of Commissioner, made up of commission and “er”?
Commission is in this case is a large payment for services rendered. “Er”
probably means who actually knows what services were rendered!
(Roel Loopers comments are at https://freoview.wordpress.com/tag/james-best/
a blog by David Taylor
________________________________________
Dear Sirs,
Decision
to approve Shire of York Budget 2015-2016
At a Special
meeting of Council held on Thursday 25 June 2015, Commissioner James Best
autonomously approved the Shire of York Budget 2015/16. Within the budget was a
provision of $625,000 to purchase lots 800 and 801 South Street, York. It is
understood that there is a commitment to purchase.
I do not believe
the decision to approve the Budget was a lawful one.
On 6 January 2015, Council was suspended and
on 7 January 2015, Commissioner James Best took up office. The first FRAC
meeting for 2015 was due to be held on 9 February 2015 however due to the
suspension of Council this did not occur. There have been no further Finance, Risk &/or Audit
Committee meetings during the first six months of 2015, yet Audit committee
meetings are to be held at least quarterly.
An independent and effective
audit committee is critical to good governance. It assists council in
discharging its responsibilities, and strengthens the financial accountability
of the council and its senior management.
Key responsibilities of the audit
committee include overseeing an entity's risk management framework, internal
control environment and the accountability of senior management, engaging with
internal and external audit and monitoring the status of actions to address
audit recommendations.
The Local
Government Act 1995 (the Act) requires that all local governments establish an Audit
Committee. The primary responsibility for
establishing and appropriately using an audit committee rests with the
appointed council.
LOCAL GOVERNMENT ACT 1995 - SECT 7.1A
(1) A local government is to establish an audit
committee of 3 or more persons to exercise the
powers and discharge the duties conferred on it.
(2) The members of the audit committee of a local
government are to be appointed* by the local
government and at least 3 of the members, and the majority of the members, are
to be council members.
* Absolute majority required.
(3) A CEO is not to be a member of an audit committee
and may not nominate a person to be a
member of an audit committee or have a person to represent him or her as a
member of an audit committee.
(4) An employee is not to be a member of an audit
committee.
Membership
The Act requires that an audit committee
is to consist of a minimum of 3 members and in that situation all must be
council members. Where a committee consists of more than 3 members then a
majority of those members must be council members. Local governments may decide
to appoint a committee involving only elected members or they may appoint one
or more persons who are external to the Council. If a Council considers it
appropriate, the whole Council can be appointed to the audit committee.
If the local
government wishes to appoint one or more persons other than elected members to
the committee, which is recommended, it should ensure that they have the
requisite knowledge and skills to provide benefit to the committee.
Operation of the Committee
Irrespective of the membership of the committee, all
legislative requirements relating to committee meetings such as advertising
meeting dates, notice of meeting and keeping minutes of meetings need to be
complied with.
I
have spoken with DLGC and subsequently to the administration at the City of
Canning Council.
I
would confirm that the current three Commissioners of Canning Council act as
the Audit Committee in place of Council.
I
would also confirm that when there was only ONE Commissioner, two external
members were appointed to make up an 'Audit Advisory Group' to enable the
process of recommendations to Council and in turn legitimise the decision
making process.
This
has not been the case at the Shire of York.
'Additional Requirements'
New regulations
were gazetted for the Local Government (Audit) Regulations 1996 in February
2013. As a result of those amendments Local Government Operational Guideline 9
– Audit in Local Governments was revised.
The new Regulation
17 prescribes a number of matters that are to be reviewed by the audit
committee.
These functions
include reviewing the Chief Executive Officer's report on the appropriateness
and effectiveness of the local government's systems in regard to risk management,
internal control and legislative compliance; and reporting the results of the
Committee's consideration of that review, to the Council.
This report and
review process is to occur at least once every two calendar years, with the
first review of each of the three areas to be completed by the CEO, reviewed by
the Audit Committee and reported to the Council, by 31 December 2014.
Western Australian
local governments are required to complete an annual Compliance Audit Return
(CAR) in accordance with the provisions of the Local Government (Audit) Regulations
1996 (Regulations). The CAR must be submitted to the Department of Local
Government and Communities (Department) by 31
March 2015.
The period
examined by this audit is 1 January to 31 December 2014 and the completed
return is required to be:
·
Reviewed by the Audit Committee
·
Considered and adopted by Council
·
Certified by the Mayor and CEO following Council adoption
·
Submitted together with a copy of the Council Minutes to the Department
by 31 March 2015.
I do not believe
that any of the 'Additional Requirements' have been discussed or
documented in the Shire minutes, however, if you can show that they have and I
am incorrect, I will graciously apologise.
I await your
response.
Yours
faithfully,
______________________
26 June 2015
