Among the $2.5 million annual salary, annual leave and other garnishment disbursements to Shire of York management and staff- one pay packet goes to the ‘Great Redactor’.
He or she is an important multi-skilled, possibly ambidextrous employee who can unerringly guide the tip of a black or red, felt-tip pen, in a perfectly straight horizontal line, to cover what is considered by those within the Shire as overly covertly important, possibly controversial, supposedly classified personal information.
Or more to the point- censor and obscure parts of the text of documents as a protective security blanket for its management and how they may not be managing to manage all that well.
In the end it is arguably to shield the Shire of York’s own interests from public scrutiny, certainly not a measure taken to protect your financial interest as the long- suffering ratepayer.
To redact or not redact-that is the question with a decision usually made by the Chief-Executive-Officer. The final determination should certainly be his.
It shows up as the dark disappearances on the Shire documents it reluctantly releases to ratepayers many, many months after they are politely requested.
The lengthy delays could be attributed, in part, to the difficulty in locating these documents from an historic, indeed archaic dysfunctional local government document filing and retrieval system.
A system claimed by some to be almost devoid of a 21st Century computer search engine capacity to locate important documents using key words- thus making it a potential target for breaches of the State Records Act 2000.
Much is supposedly manual extraction, allegedly, a labour intensive, highly expensive activity that the shire has been known to whinge about, blaming the ratepayer for the exorbitant cost-and the audacity in questioning its actions and authority.
This is where its accusation of Vexatious Complainant comes in.
Obviously there may be another reason for delays, other than the excuse that it cannot be located.
It is probably that the Shire of York really does not want the ratepayer to realize what it is actually up to, especially when it is spending a large amount of ratepayers and or taxpayers money on your assets that have not been maintained as they are required to be.
You want good quality, safe local roads to drive your kids to school along- which are not potential death traps? No let’s have a Shire debt trap instead- your own Tavern, Bar and CafĂ© that will always be a financial millstone around ratepayer’s necks.
So what do these black skid marks actually cover that is so important it needs to be withheld from outside scrutiny?
In most cases no-one other than the Shire and the mentor, WALGA, is quite sure.
It is mostly just direct line/ mobile telephone numbers, email addresses, a signature or two, maybe even hiding an online diploma in sewerage waste management from the University of the Cayman Islands behind a person’s name. Joe Blogger (Dip. SWM. UCI.) If it is -it could well be a first (diploma) for the Shire of York.
It could be just me, but given the content of one page of a document regarding shire payments-if I had my own redoubtable redacting pen poised I would have had a close look at whether I should remove the company names of Stabilised Pavements Australia Pty, to be paid $1.175, 525 by the Shire and Tracc Civil Pty Ltd which would receive $259,214 from a Shire decision.
There is an element of Competitive Commercial Confidentiality here that could arguable affect both these companies when their rivals scope what they did and what they charged for it.
What was redacted was the Endorsement by Evaluation Panel signatures, being those of Paul Crewe, Allan Rourke and Brett Howson, spelt with two T’s instead of one.
Maybe some of these ‘black-outs’ relate to the Shire of York Policy Manual, including Procurement F1.2 dealing with the purchase of goods and services and the contracting of others to be involved in doing so?
These services could include the engagement of a consultant, and or contractor, or three.
According to the policy manual- all employees engaged in procurement must act in an efficient, transparent, ethical manner, providing value for money and meeting legislative requirements.
It appears, other than some ambiguous references, the term Financial Accountability may not get a mention?
Maybe the term not-particularly-appropriate-collaboration, which may occur in negotiations over the provision of these services, does not get a relevant, honourable reveal either? The distinct possibility is it is not notated at all.
Maybe it is all a Shire misunderstanding of the meaning of the terms positive and open communication, and transparency, and accountability to its ratepayers and general community?
Then again-maybe not!
One example that could be the subject of an external review is a Capital Works Program document (Tender 01-1617) dated Friday December 16, 2016.
It appears that this document is sourced from ATF BK&E Family Trust T/A Howson Technical PO Box 619 DONNYBROOK WA 6239 and claims that HOWSON Management P/L will not be liable for any loss, damage, cost or expense incurred or arising by any reason of any unauthorized person using or relying on information in this publication.
This is the header at the top of one of the released document pages.
It could be argued that it is extremely inappropriate for the Howson company disclaimer to be published on a Capital Works Program tender document that is not its tender- but that of the Shire of York.
The content of this document is actually authored by Paul Crewe, and has what he does, who he is employed by, and therefore his authority to enter into the negotiations contained therein- REDACTED!
The document is addressed to Bret Howson whose interest, pecuniary or otherwise, his employment whether tenderer or contractor and thereby his authority to receive and read the content of this document-is REDACTED.
The second cc- recipient is Allan Rourke who has also had his bona-fides-REDACTED.
The most interesting part of the document deals with the Shire of York’s program management for surveying and design works on its local roads and contains the following paragraph:-
 |
| "...then engage you as best value for money to undertake these works...and avoid seeking 3 quotes for the works..." |
Just two months later Mr. Bret Howson, trading as Howson Technical and Howson Management PL, is now Howson Engineering Pty Ltd and is the independent consulting engineer on a Shire of York Evaluation Panel consisting of Paul Crewe, EMIDS and Allan Rourke Manager of Works.
There is no REDACTION here.
This panel’s recommendation is for an expenditure of $1.534, 739 on a local roadworks package. This requires a Public Tender process as prescribed in the
Local Government (Functions and General) Regulations 1996.
Then we find out from a separate
memorandum to the Shire of York Councillors from the Chief-Executive-Officer that
Mr. Bret Howson, considered by Paul Martin to be a well-regarded local
government engineer has been engaged to develop a Draft 10- Year Road Program
for Council.
This memorandum was dated August 26, 2016.
Two days later Mr. Martin proudly announces in The Avon Valley Advocate (August 28, 2016) that Mr. Paul Crewe has been engaged as a senior Shire of York Executive Manager stressing that he has qualifications in engineering.
So in just 48 hours Mr. Martin has managed to engage someone who appears to have no road maintenance engineering qualifications to develop a most important 10-year road program.
And then engaged a senior manager as a permanent employee whose role should be to develop a 10-year road program being someone who Mr. Martin claims is a qualified engineer.
Did Mr. Martin put the chicken (Paul Crewe) before or after the egg (Bret Howson.) and why did he hire both? It must be said the end result has been a messy omelette lined with the shells of what should be good roads.
So Howson has been hired by the Shire of York in late August, obviously for a substantial fee. On December 16, 2016, Paul Crewe, who arrived in October, appears to suggest he is shuffling the decks to engage Mr. Howson as best value for money to undertake these works. Yet it appears that Mr. Howson has already been hired by the CEO!
So forget the chicken and egg analogy-Is this piggy-backing, double dipping- or what? - Only Paul Martin knows as Crewe and Rourke are long gone.
Given the continuing complaints regarding the design and maintenance on local roads, it does not appear to be ratepayer’s money well spent and there are questions still to be answered by the President and the CEO regarding the actual reason for Paul Crewe’s resignation.
This memorandum was dated August 26, 2016.
Two days later Mr. Martin proudly announces in The Avon Valley Advocate (August 28, 2016) that Mr. Paul Crewe has been engaged as a senior Shire of York Executive Manager stressing that he has qualifications in engineering.
So in just 48 hours Mr. Martin has managed to engage someone who appears to have no road maintenance engineering qualifications to develop a most important 10-year road program.
And then engaged a senior manager as a permanent employee whose role should be to develop a 10-year road program being someone who Mr. Martin claims is a qualified engineer.
 |
| Independent consulting Engineer? |
Did Mr. Martin put the chicken (Paul Crewe) before or after the egg (Bret Howson.) and why did he hire both? It must be said the end result has been a messy omelette lined with the shells of what should be good roads.
So Howson has been hired by the Shire of York in late August, obviously for a substantial fee. On December 16, 2016, Paul Crewe, who arrived in October, appears to suggest he is shuffling the decks to engage Mr. Howson as best value for money to undertake these works. Yet it appears that Mr. Howson has already been hired by the CEO!
So forget the chicken and egg analogy-Is this piggy-backing, double dipping- or what? - Only Paul Martin knows as Crewe and Rourke are long gone.
Given the continuing complaints regarding the design and maintenance on local roads, it does not appear to be ratepayer’s money well spent and there are questions still to be answered by the President and the CEO regarding the actual reason for Paul Crewe’s resignation.
Former Shire of Cockburn
councillor (resigned) and lawyer, Mr Richard Graham, may be just as interested
as everyone else. He has, in the past, shown some concerns.
Mr. Howson is now acting at what Mr. Crewe was and Mr. Martin has just hired a casual Engineering Technical Officer to be Mr. Howson’s playmate. He is not a consultant but an employee of the shire.
Now employees are supposed to be paid a salary, Superannuation, annual leave and long service leave (pro-rata) provided tools of trade such as a mobile phone and access to a computer, office space at around $800 per square metre, use of a shire motor vehicle if required, obviously provided with insurance cover and various forms of counselling- if required. And in this employee’s case, use of a shire house
This employee could be considered a bit strange if he did not make all these demands even if his employment is for 3 months only.
Consultants and contractors negotiate a fee for service. They are responsible for most other on-costs in the delivery.
So what is the fantastic financial reasoning here for hiring an employee, not a consultant, being what is the cost saving in doing so?
There is also the vexed, even vexatious questioning of any previous interrelationships between Mr. Martin, Mr Crewe and Mr. Howson who, on Ground Hog Day, appear to have all been involved in local government in some manner the Busselton, Bunbury and Donnybrook areas, maybe over similar periods in time.
It could be suggested that if they did not know each other personally, they were aware of each other. Therefore is it just a coincidence that all three end up working at the same Shire Council at the same time?
One lasted not more than 12 months and there is some community concern that the other does not have the engineering qualification, and expertise, that Mr. Martin claims that he has- in his previous memorandum to all councillors, and some staff.
On the Internet- it appears in a personal summary, if it is the same Mr. Howson, he has been in the civil engineering business since 1984.
He goes on to wax lyrical and publically declare that ‘this year is 30 years of designing and moving dirt and I enjoy the challenge more today. The science of design is amazing. The smell of construction is refreshing’.
Herein lays some degree of ambiguity.
A professional gardener is also one who designs stuff, moves dirt and enjoys the smell of construction that usually includes fertilizer such as bullshit.
Mr. Howson lists 19 skills from Managing Excel to Stakeholder Engagement. A degree in Engineering in Road construction and maintenance is not one of them. In fact there is no reference to any form of engineering degree.
In the end these are all questions that, one day soon, may well require a definitive answer.
(1) does the Shire of York actually know its legal obligations regarding any Redaction required within its documents released under Freedom of Information guidelines and demands?
Mr. Howson is now acting at what Mr. Crewe was and Mr. Martin has just hired a casual Engineering Technical Officer to be Mr. Howson’s playmate. He is not a consultant but an employee of the shire.
Now employees are supposed to be paid a salary, Superannuation, annual leave and long service leave (pro-rata) provided tools of trade such as a mobile phone and access to a computer, office space at around $800 per square metre, use of a shire motor vehicle if required, obviously provided with insurance cover and various forms of counselling- if required. And in this employee’s case, use of a shire house
This employee could be considered a bit strange if he did not make all these demands even if his employment is for 3 months only.
Consultants and contractors negotiate a fee for service. They are responsible for most other on-costs in the delivery.
So what is the fantastic financial reasoning here for hiring an employee, not a consultant, being what is the cost saving in doing so?
There is also the vexed, even vexatious questioning of any previous interrelationships between Mr. Martin, Mr Crewe and Mr. Howson who, on Ground Hog Day, appear to have all been involved in local government in some manner the Busselton, Bunbury and Donnybrook areas, maybe over similar periods in time.
It could be suggested that if they did not know each other personally, they were aware of each other. Therefore is it just a coincidence that all three end up working at the same Shire Council at the same time?
One lasted not more than 12 months and there is some community concern that the other does not have the engineering qualification, and expertise, that Mr. Martin claims that he has- in his previous memorandum to all councillors, and some staff.
On the Internet- it appears in a personal summary, if it is the same Mr. Howson, he has been in the civil engineering business since 1984.
He goes on to wax lyrical and publically declare that ‘this year is 30 years of designing and moving dirt and I enjoy the challenge more today. The science of design is amazing. The smell of construction is refreshing’.
Herein lays some degree of ambiguity.
A professional gardener is also one who designs stuff, moves dirt and enjoys the smell of construction that usually includes fertilizer such as bullshit.
Mr. Howson lists 19 skills from Managing Excel to Stakeholder Engagement. A degree in Engineering in Road construction and maintenance is not one of them. In fact there is no reference to any form of engineering degree.
In the end these are all questions that, one day soon, may well require a definitive answer.
(1) does the Shire of York actually know its legal obligations regarding any Redaction required within its documents released under Freedom of Information guidelines and demands?
(2) is the Shire prepared to
explain why a person was hired, apparently without the correct procedure of
obtaining three (3) quotes required in the circumstances of engagement?
(3) why does the Shire claim that this person is ‘a well-regarded local government engineering consultant when it appears that he has no engineering qualifications?
(4) does the Shire recognize that it may be in breach of its duty of care, ethically, morally, legislatively and possibly legally in the steps taken in (2) and the unsubstantiated claim made in (3)?
5) what is the actual reason for the resignation of Mr. Paul Crewe. Was it an issue of staff discipline or the issue of continuing poor road maintenance oversight?
6) what is the reason for Mr. Bret Howson being employed in an acting capacity only and does the short term employment of an Engineering Technical Officer (whatever that means) reflect on Mr. Howson perceived long term ability to meet his Key-Performance Indicators.
David Taylor.
(3) why does the Shire claim that this person is ‘a well-regarded local government engineering consultant when it appears that he has no engineering qualifications?
(4) does the Shire recognize that it may be in breach of its duty of care, ethically, morally, legislatively and possibly legally in the steps taken in (2) and the unsubstantiated claim made in (3)?
5) what is the actual reason for the resignation of Mr. Paul Crewe. Was it an issue of staff discipline or the issue of continuing poor road maintenance oversight?
6) what is the reason for Mr. Bret Howson being employed in an acting capacity only and does the short term employment of an Engineering Technical Officer (whatever that means) reflect on Mr. Howson perceived long term ability to meet his Key-Performance Indicators.
David Taylor.
"There is a degree of inference in the above text that could suggest some manipulative malpractice has taken place."
ReplyDeleteAn understatement if ever there was one!
Demonstrates the cosy nature of relationships behind the scenes.
Outrageous
DeletePaul Martin's position as CEO is now untenable.
He has set this community back years by engaging a fraud to fill the critical role of Civil Engineer.
This matter should be reffered to the Auditor General for examination and prosecution.
Shire president David Wallace is probably frozen to a bar stool down at the Gwamby Tavern and should be released from his duties and the 40 thousand a year he has been fleecing from this community.
Time to elect a president with the brains, balls and integrity to protect this community from organised crime.
Howson should be suspended immediately to prevent the destruction of incriminating shire documents as happened in the past.
How different would our shire be had those crooks Pat Hooper, Tony Boyle and the inglorious bastard himself Mark Duperouzal not suppressed the Fitzgerald report.
What level of accountability will WALGA take in all of this, none I imagine.
Paul Martin has openly admitted that he knows Bret Howson very well having worked together many times in the past.
ReplyDeleteHe knew exactly what Bret Howson is and isn't and simply banked on the stupidity of the Shire President and the apathy of the ratepayers.
He was right on one count but sadly misjudged the intelligence and determination of the men and women who had stopped Ray Hooper in his tracks.
They have been Patient like the Mountain and have simply run out enough rope for the greedy fools to hang themselves. Copious records have been kept and constant communication with the Arogant CEO has ensured there is a clear paper trail for the investigators and prosecutors to draw upon.
Now to handle the WALGA rear guard action.
Suspend council! Sorry you tried that one.
Call in the police to intimidate the wise, sorry, three times already and no long term result.
How about we deal with this one above board, you know, as the law would have it.
Its never going to change is it.
ReplyDeleteInstead of looking after the interests of the public its become a giant rort where mates look after mates.
Check the financial report in the agenda for mondays OCM.
ReplyDeleteHowson Technical has his big soft hand out for SEVENTEEN THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS for a months part time work.
Outstanding effort Bret Howson
Perhaps Council might like to put a hold on payments until we find out who he is.
OMG Anonymous 24 May 18:32, you're right, if he has no qualification he's nothing more than a con-man.
DeleteGreat work, David. It seems we're stuck with a polite version of a previous unhappy era - I mean we still have excessive spending and patronage, but these days without the concomitant thuggery. As the saying goes, you get what you vote for.
ReplyDeleteI'm still trying to understand the reasoning behind redacting signatures but leaving untouched the names they're attached to. Can anyone help me here?
The shire still redacts Ray Hooper’s signature despite the fact it appears on a decade’s worth of meeting agendas and minutes, all of which have been published and are readily available on the internet.
DeleteGood luck James, trying to understand the reasoning behind redacting signatures but leaving the names untouched.
Government agencies argue that a signature is ‘personal information’ as defined in the Act, which is a complete load of tripe.
The whole point of a signature is that it gives legal effect to a document, contract, approval, direction, infringement, letter etc etc etc.
The stupidity of it all is evident, when, as part of a Freedom of Information decision, the decision maker redacts his/hers signature from released documents but then signs the notice of decision which cannot be redacted. Go figure.
I suspect the real reason is that the signatory is illiterate, this was certainly the case with Ray Hooper.
Looking at Mays financials Bret Howsen invoiced for his 79 hours for two weeks of EMIDS work, then submitted further invoices for 23 hours for project management work which should have been carried out as part of his EMIDS role, ie double dipping.
ReplyDeleteA little further looking and we see his next claim is 69 hourse for two weeks of EMIDS work, then another 40 hours of project management.
DeleteNow with a simple simultaneous equation we can use both claims to determine the rate difference between EMIDS and Project Management. Roughly $37 per hour for the EMIDS and $200 per hour for Project Management.
So who is checking his hours. Thats 102 hours and 109 hours per fortnight. How does that fit with the 38 hour week everyone else is working.
Does Paul Martin read, sign or check anything, a recent senior exec has described him as teflon coated, no emails no minutes of briefings no direction at all basically. Does tend to cook the employees when they are isolated from leadership and a shared sense of responsibility.
Time will tell Paul.