Yes, James P, with Cr. Hooper 'turning against the community's manifest wishes' in the vote of response to the Show Cause Notice, voting one way for fear of community reaction on the spot, and then acting contradictorily to his public vote by colluding in more private manner with Mr. Morris in the form of a 'minority report', we have the second (that we know of; there may be more) blatant act of disregard of The Will of the People of York — the other also committed in our Town Hall being, of course, Cr. Duperouzel's betrayal on the SITA issue only a few months earlier. It sure makes the mind boggle about the integrity of some elected councillors. Makes one wary, as well. It sure doesn't represent York Citizenry very well to the good folk in Perth. The Department, Minister and Government must be laughing up their sleeves at how York and certain of its Citizens can be manipulated, bullied, etc....
Then, James, once again we have the issue of what has the most power to hurt us is that we don't know what we don't know. You have put your finger on one such matter; we don't know the reason (if there truly be one) why we have been denied certain information, because we don't know why (or if it indeed truly) revealing it would contravene some 'rubric of legal professional privilege'. Thank you for putting your finger on that matter, and demanding/requesting the answers. Thank goodness that in doing this work on our behalf you are not falling into this particular trap.
It's sad but true that some folk seek public office, elective or otherwise, with a view to enriching themselves, e.g. through access to insider information, or by making decisions that benefit people who can repay favours in one way or another. We've all heard of the good old 'brown paper bag', but there many roads to moral ruin for politicians and public servants willing to trade their integrity for personal advantage.
The puzzle in this case is that Cr Hooper, whatever his faults, has never to the best of my knowledge used public office as a means of feathering his own nest. So I'm baffled by his behaviour in voting as he did, then engaging in a squalid conspiracy with David Morris and others equally to be condemned. What motivated him to do that? If he had voted against the popular position, I would have disagreed with him, but I would have respected him for following his conscience. I'm sure many others would have felt the same, and not seen his subsequent hobnobbing with Mr Morris as toadying, or sucking up to power.
I'm not optimistic that the DLGC will release the documents I'm after. I've a strong suspicion that I'll have to go to external review, i.e. the FOI Commissioner himself. Even then I might be unlucky, but if I fail it won't be for want of trying.
Thought for the Day: Secrecy is the first step on the path to corruption.
It seems very strange that the DLG released that ministerial briefing note but not the others.
Corruption .... on Friday the CCC released its Misconduct Intelligence Assessment which included ......wait for it ..... in the medium high risk area was the .... Department of Local Government and Communities.
Shock horror disbelief consumed the citizens of York.
Well well well, why should we be surprised to hear that.
If the CCC had bothered to ask us here in York, we could have saved them the job of doing the assessment.
My guess is, there is a reshuffle looming and the DLG will be amalgamated with another Government Department.....oh my gosh did I use that word amalgamation.
On Friday 12/12/2014 5:05 AM an email was sent to Mr David Morris at the Department of Local Government and Communities. The gist of the email was to inform Mr Morris that one of his statements published in the Ministers Show Cause Notice was false and misleading, Mr Morris did not respond. The same email was resent on Thursday 12/18/2014 1:54 PM, again Mr Morris failed to respond. The email was then sent to Ms Jenni Law at the Department of Local Government and Communities on Friday 12/19/2014 12:20 PM, she chose not to respond. The email was evidence that Shire President Reid did not leak the FitzGerald Report as Mr Morris circumlocutorily implied in his report to the Minister. With the full knowledge that some of the content of his report was factually incorrect and misleading, Mr Morris chose to submit his probity enquiry findings to the Minister. In the Ministers defense, he had little alternative other than to believe the probity inquiry findings reported to him by his Department officers. On 7 January 2015 the Minister suspended the Shire of York Council as a result of Mr Morris's dubious ad hoc inquiry findings. This example of gross misconduct by a Government Department reinforces the statement made in the latest press release by the Corruption and crime commissioner that the Department of Local Government and Communities is an agency "at greater inherent risk of corruption and misconduct". Hang in there people, the truth will out.
Incredible, but nothing is surprising me now when it comes to the DLGC. So now we have the purchase order signed/not signed debacle (just a small factual error - like fact as in evidence) and the ignoring of evidence concerning the leaked report. What happened about the allegation concerning the tape recording of a meeting - I thought that had been well and truly refuted. Did the DLG correct that or still claim otherwise.
However, let us remember that Ms Matthews is responsible for Morris, Law and Jolly. Misleading your Minister is frowned upon in some circles. No wonder they are running scared about the FOI.
Is it possible to publish those emails (redacted if necessary to protect the innocent if necessary).
In the absence of any trust that any government agency or representative will actually do anything in the interest of the York community, this blog is the only voice of the community.
It is possible to publish the emails but it will not serve any purpose other than confirm what I have already stated, Mr Morris and Ms Law will know exactly who I am if the Department are monitoring the blog, which I suspect they are. The emails fall within the scope of Mr Plumridge's Freedom of Information, accordingly, the Department is duty-bound to release them. The question you need to be asking , is why Mr Morris and Ms Law failed to investigate the facts contained in the emails.
It is now evident certain people within the DLG were in over drive to dispense with Matthew Reid and nothing was going to stop them, NOT EVEN THE TRUTH. The question is why? Few Staff in the DLG, if any, would have known Matthew Reid, so why did they target him so soon after he was elected? We know Pat Hooper's sneaky contribution. How many other ex York Councillors were involved in the sordid plot to remove our Shire President? Matthew Reid was probably the biggest threat RH had come across in his whole career because he stood for democracy. We all know what happens to people in York who stand for democracy and truth, they have lies told about them to discredit them. Is this what happened to Matthew Reid? You can bet your life on it! Were those involved in the Probity Audit (including Shire Staff) willing to do anything to bring Matthew down, including lie to the Minister? By the way, who was the smart arse in the Shire Administration who showed the Probity Police the Shire order book claiming Matthew Reid's signature was on it? The truth will be uncovered and I suspect it wont be by the Minister, it will be by the Public Probity Audit on this Blog. Hang in there Matthew you have the majority of York standing beside you.
Hear hear. We run the timeline and the probity audit of the DLGC.
More to the point, who was the smart arse probity police investigator that "saw" the Shire Order book showing Reid's signature. That was a great example of the competency of the probity audit, which seems to have been given an objective and then the task of writing a report to meet that objective. Don't let a few facts get in the way of a good story (for a pat on the back from the bosses).
I asked the CEO Mr. G. Simpson to show me the order book and the signature that was alleged to be Matthew Reids. Mr. Simpson pointed to the signature and said the Christian name appeared to start with a M and the surname appeared to end with a D. It didn't look anything like Matthew Reid's signature to me, and asked if the DLG people had forensic writing experience.
IF the Probity Police concluded it was Matthew Reid's signature simply because the first letter may have been an M and the last letter may have been a D then they were desperate to nail Matthew and were prepared to use anything they could find.
They were too stupid to consider having an expert look at the signature and compare it with Matthews.
A staff member inside the Administration had to have drawn the DLG's attention to the order book in the first place. It had to have been someone who had access to the order book as well as having it in for Matthew. That narrows the field a bit.
I don't know what documents Greyman Simpson showed you, I inspected the purchase orders allegedly signed by Matthew Reid and its as plain as the nose on your face Keeble signed them. David Morris made yet another fundamental mistake of believing a member of the Shire of York administration.
Change of subject guys sorry but just to let everyone know the Fringe Benefits (RH) possible tax evasion report is now lodged with the ATO as promised.
Lovely, its going to be interesting to see who's liable, the ratepayers or Ray? You can bet your last dollar the Department and the Commissioner will do what ever they can to make it go away.
Its worthwhile going back to the Morris memo from time to time.
Apart from the purchase order signature debacle, he seems to acknowledge that (unknown but presumed to be Reid) did not inappropriately release the Fitzgerald Report to the media. Well, why was that even alleged? It also raises the pertinent question - if he did not, who did? They were the investigators were they not. But that answer would not have suited their objective would it.
Then he goes on the Shire failure to acknowledge as a concern those areas which self evidentially reflects basic matters relating to good governance. WHAT!!!! Self evidentiary - or self delusional perhaps. So, no evidence, instead make it self evidentiary, that way there is no evidence required.
Further, guilty of a lack of understanding of the roles and responsibilities of elected members. Well, that is a broad motherhood statement if ever I have heard one. Who, how, when, why - but again no evidence, just a broad statement to justify the objective.
Then, the (unknown but presumed Reid) acting unilaterally outside his role. But no evidence. How, when, who. Not one single example. But gee, it looks bad for the Ministers consumption, and that was the intent.
Let us all pray our thanks that these "investigators" are only with the DLGC and not dealing with serious issues, otherwise a lot of us would be on death row. I reckon John Cleese would love this material.
Slightly off topic but still relating to FOI's; Does anyone have an update from Ms Walters relating to the Commissioners decision regarding her FOI documents connected to the York Recreation & Convention Centre? Has Ms Walters received the documents ordered to be given? If so, has there been any information collated?
Just a though, David Taylor has posted on the same subject, the two posts could be connected and monitored together.
One comment consisting of ten considered lines of text has discernible meaning, whereas, ten comments consisting of one un-considered line has not.
It's not about quantity, its quality that counts.
Comments -anonymity:
Plato's book 'The Republic', contains a passage where a character named Glaucon relates a story of a shepherd named Gyges who discovers a ring which has the power to make him invisible. Realising the potency of his new possession, Gyges uses it to seduce the queen and murder the king, thus establishing himself as the new ruler. Yet, prior to discovering the ring, Gyges was a rather ordinary guy, a humble shepherd who worked hard for his pay and never hurt anyone. Glaucon’s point is that the only reason Gyges behaved himself was to avoid reprisal. He obeyed the laws because he feared he’d get caught and punished if he disobeyed. So when he happened upon a means to avoid such consequences, he exploited it to the extreme. Furthermore, Glaucon suggests that all of us are like Gyges. The only reason we act morally to the extent that we do, is because we are compelled by the laws governing society. The truth is, says Glaucon, we are immoral by nature, and if any of us had the Ring of Gyges, we’d act no differently than that ordinary shepherd.
Yes, James P, with Cr. Hooper 'turning against the community's manifest wishes' in the vote of response to the Show Cause Notice, voting one way for fear of community reaction on the spot, and then acting contradictorily to his public vote by colluding in more private manner with Mr. Morris in the form of a 'minority report', we have the second (that we know of; there may be more) blatant act of disregard of The Will of the People of York — the other also committed in our Town Hall being, of course, Cr. Duperouzel's betrayal on the SITA issue only a few months earlier. It sure makes the mind boggle about the integrity of some elected councillors. Makes one wary, as well. It sure doesn't represent York Citizenry very well to the good folk in Perth. The Department, Minister and Government must be laughing up their sleeves at how York and certain of its Citizens can be manipulated, bullied, etc....
ReplyDeleteThen, James, once again we have the issue of what has the most power to hurt us is that we don't know what we don't know. You have put your finger on one such matter; we don't know the reason (if there truly be one) why we have been denied certain information, because we don't know why (or if it indeed truly) revealing it would contravene some 'rubric of legal professional privilege'. Thank you for putting your finger on that matter, and demanding/requesting the answers. Thank goodness that in doing this work on our behalf you are not falling into this particular trap.
It's sad but true that some folk seek public office, elective or otherwise, with a view to enriching themselves, e.g. through access to insider information, or by making decisions that benefit people who can repay favours in one way or another. We've all heard of the good old 'brown paper bag', but there many roads to moral ruin for politicians and public servants willing to trade their integrity for personal advantage.
DeleteThe puzzle in this case is that Cr Hooper, whatever his faults, has never to the best of my knowledge used public office as a means of feathering his own nest. So I'm baffled by his behaviour in voting as he did, then engaging in a squalid conspiracy with David Morris and others equally to be condemned. What motivated him to do that? If he had voted against the popular position, I would have disagreed with him, but I would have respected him for following his conscience. I'm sure many others would have felt the same, and not seen his subsequent hobnobbing with Mr Morris as toadying, or sucking up to power.
I'm not optimistic that the DLGC will release the documents I'm after. I've a strong suspicion that I'll have to go to external review, i.e. the FOI Commissioner himself. Even then I might be unlucky, but if I fail it won't be for want of trying.
Thought for the Day: Secrecy is the first step on the path to corruption.
It seems very strange that the DLG released that ministerial briefing note but not the others.
DeleteCorruption .... on Friday the CCC released its Misconduct Intelligence Assessment which included ......wait for it ..... in the medium high risk area was the .... Department of Local Government and Communities.
Shock horror disbelief consumed the citizens of York.
Well well well, why should we be surprised to hear that.
ReplyDeleteIf the CCC had bothered to ask us here in York, we could have saved them the job of doing the assessment.
My guess is, there is a reshuffle looming and the DLG will be amalgamated with another Government Department.....oh my gosh did I use that word amalgamation.
On Friday 12/12/2014 5:05 AM an email was sent to Mr David Morris at the Department of Local Government and Communities.
ReplyDeleteThe gist of the email was to inform Mr Morris that one of his statements published in the Ministers Show Cause Notice was false and misleading, Mr Morris did not respond. The same email was resent on Thursday 12/18/2014 1:54 PM, again Mr Morris failed to respond.
The email was then sent to Ms Jenni Law at the Department of Local Government and Communities on Friday 12/19/2014 12:20 PM, she chose not to respond.
The email was evidence that Shire President Reid did not leak the FitzGerald Report as Mr Morris circumlocutorily implied in his report to the Minister.
With the full knowledge that some of the content of his report was factually incorrect and misleading, Mr Morris chose to submit his probity enquiry findings to the Minister.
In the Ministers defense, he had little alternative other than to believe the probity inquiry findings reported to him by his Department officers.
On 7 January 2015 the Minister suspended the Shire of York Council as a result of Mr Morris's dubious ad hoc inquiry findings.
This example of gross misconduct by a Government Department reinforces the statement made in the latest press release by the Corruption and crime commissioner that the Department of Local Government and Communities is an agency "at greater inherent risk of corruption and misconduct".
Hang in there people, the truth will out.
Incredible, but nothing is surprising me now when it comes to the DLGC. So now we have the purchase order signed/not signed debacle (just a small factual error - like fact as in evidence) and the ignoring of evidence concerning the leaked report. What happened about the allegation concerning the tape recording of a meeting - I thought that had been well and truly refuted. Did the DLG correct that or still claim otherwise.
ReplyDeleteHowever, let us remember that Ms Matthews is responsible for Morris, Law and Jolly. Misleading your Minister is frowned upon in some circles. No wonder they are running scared about the FOI.
Is it possible to publish those emails (redacted if necessary to protect the innocent if necessary).
In the absence of any trust that any government agency or representative will actually do anything in the interest of the York community, this blog is the only voice of the community.
It is possible to publish the emails but it will not serve any purpose other than confirm what I have already stated, Mr Morris and Ms Law will know exactly who I am if the Department are monitoring the blog, which I suspect they are. The emails fall within the scope of Mr Plumridge's Freedom of Information, accordingly, the Department is duty-bound to release them.
DeleteThe question you need to be asking , is why Mr Morris and Ms Law failed to investigate the facts contained in the emails.
It is now evident certain people within the DLG were in over drive to dispense with Matthew Reid and nothing was going to stop them, NOT EVEN THE TRUTH.
ReplyDeleteThe question is why? Few Staff in the DLG, if any, would have known Matthew Reid, so why did they target him so soon after he was elected?
We know Pat Hooper's sneaky contribution. How many other ex York Councillors were involved in the sordid plot to remove our Shire President?
Matthew Reid was probably the biggest threat RH had come across in his whole career because he stood for democracy. We all know what happens to people in York who stand for democracy and truth, they have lies told about them to discredit them. Is this what happened to Matthew Reid? You can bet your life on it!
Were those involved in the Probity Audit (including Shire Staff) willing to do anything to bring Matthew down, including lie to the Minister?
By the way, who was the smart arse in the Shire Administration who showed the Probity Police the Shire order book claiming Matthew Reid's signature was on it?
The truth will be uncovered and I suspect it wont be by the Minister, it will be by the Public Probity Audit on this Blog.
Hang in there Matthew you have the majority of York standing beside you.
Hear hear. We run the timeline and the probity audit of the DLGC.
DeleteMore to the point, who was the smart arse probity police investigator that "saw" the Shire Order book showing Reid's signature. That was a great example of the competency of the probity audit, which seems to have been given an objective and then the task of writing a report to meet that objective. Don't let a few facts get in the way of a good story (for a pat on the back from the bosses).
Our Ms Matthews future is looking a bit shaky.
I asked the CEO Mr. G. Simpson to show me the order book and the signature that was alleged to be Matthew Reids. Mr. Simpson pointed to the signature and said the Christian name appeared to start with a M and the surname appeared to end with a D. It didn't look anything like Matthew Reid's signature to me, and asked if the DLG people had forensic writing experience.
DeleteIF the Probity Police concluded it was Matthew Reid's signature simply because the first letter may have been an M and the last letter may have been a D then they were desperate to nail Matthew and were prepared to use anything they could find.
They were too stupid to consider having an expert look at the signature and compare it with Matthews.
A staff member inside the Administration had to have drawn the DLG's attention to the order book in the first place. It had to have been someone who had access to the order book as well as having it in for Matthew. That narrows the field a bit.
I don't know what documents Greyman Simpson showed you, I inspected the purchase orders allegedly signed by Matthew Reid and its as plain as the nose on your face Keeble signed them.
DeleteDavid Morris made yet another fundamental mistake of believing a member of the Shire of York administration.
Page views to date 80,098.
ReplyDeleteChange of subject guys sorry but just to let everyone know the Fringe Benefits (RH) possible tax evasion report is now lodged with the ATO as promised.
ReplyDeleteLovely, its going to be interesting to see who's liable, the ratepayers or Ray?
DeleteYou can bet your last dollar the Department and the Commissioner will do what ever they can to make it go away.
Its worthwhile going back to the Morris memo from time to time.
ReplyDeleteApart from the purchase order signature debacle, he seems to acknowledge that (unknown but presumed to be Reid) did not inappropriately release the Fitzgerald Report to the media. Well, why was that even alleged? It also raises the pertinent question - if he did not, who did? They were the investigators were they not. But that answer would not have suited their objective would it.
Then he goes on the Shire failure to acknowledge as a concern those areas which self evidentially reflects basic matters relating to good governance. WHAT!!!! Self evidentiary - or self delusional perhaps. So, no evidence, instead make it self evidentiary, that way there is no evidence required.
Further, guilty of a lack of understanding of the roles and responsibilities of elected members. Well, that is a broad motherhood statement if ever I have heard one. Who, how, when, why - but again no evidence, just a broad statement to justify the objective.
Then, the (unknown but presumed Reid) acting unilaterally outside his role. But no evidence. How, when, who. Not one single example. But gee, it looks bad for the Ministers consumption, and that was the intent.
Let us all pray our thanks that these "investigators" are only with the DLGC and not dealing with serious issues, otherwise a lot of us would be on death row. I reckon John Cleese would love this material.
Slightly off topic but still relating to FOI's;
ReplyDeleteDoes anyone have an update from Ms Walters relating to the Commissioners decision regarding her FOI documents connected to the York Recreation & Convention Centre?
Has Ms Walters received the documents ordered to be given?
If so, has there been any information collated?
Just a though, David Taylor has posted on the same subject, the two posts could be connected and monitored together.
Comments-volume:
ReplyDeleteOne comment consisting of ten considered lines of text has discernible meaning, whereas, ten comments consisting of one un-considered line has not.
It's not about quantity, its quality that counts.
Comments -anonymity:
Plato's book 'The Republic', contains a passage where a character named Glaucon relates a story of a shepherd named Gyges who discovers a ring which has the power to make him invisible. Realising the potency of his new possession, Gyges uses it to seduce the queen and murder the king, thus establishing himself as the new ruler. Yet, prior to discovering the ring, Gyges was a rather ordinary guy, a humble shepherd who worked hard for his pay and never hurt anyone. Glaucon’s point is that the only reason Gyges behaved himself was to avoid reprisal. He obeyed the laws because he feared he’d get caught and punished if he disobeyed. So when he happened upon a means to avoid such consequences, he exploited it to the extreme. Furthermore, Glaucon suggests that all of us are like Gyges. The only reason we act morally to the extent that we do, is because we are compelled by the laws governing society. The truth is, says Glaucon, we are immoral by nature, and if any of us had the Ring of Gyges, we’d act no differently than that ordinary shepherd.