The submissions are in; LG Act review submissions 171 in all that are available for public scrutiny, which
will hopefully give local government a new lease on life within the structure
and strictures of the proposed Local
Government Act 2018. Some may be opportunistic, some boring, some banal,
some even spooky. Some, at least 61, are private and confidential. For what
legitimate reason is the scary part.
There are too many to review so it is a small smattering hovering between the sublime and the ridiculous.
The West Australian Corruption and Crime Commission:-
Sadly, in the past, this august crime and corruption hunting body has tainted itself with some spectacular failures.
In fact at times it was laughable, prosecuting more of its own staff than others who are corrupt, and involving itself in pursuing cases which were blatantly unwinnable to a bitter and expensive dead end.
Allegedly-there were some undertaken just to hound persons of interest for purely vindictive reasons, with spite and malice thrown in- because the commission was made to look foolish and inept in its initial handling of the case.
The WACCC claims in its submission that it has invested substantial resources towards addressing serious misconduct in the local government sector.
Its known wins do not correlate well with investment being just ‘Serious Misconduct at the Shire of Exmouth’ and ‘Governance at the Shire of Dowerin’ in the past two years. That is just one a year.
However its assessment that the complexity of the nature of services provided, the amount of public and business engagement and the massive volume of public funds used can give rise to serious misconduct is correct.
The requirement for improving the accountability of both councillors and employees, the separation of powers between council and administration, much higher professional standards to be shown by elected members and the keeping of proper minutes of closed meetings for future review thereby providing for improved transparency- should be mandatory under the new Act.
The fact that the WACCC feels there is markedly insufficient performance monitoring of Chief Executive Officers leading to the risk of serious misconduct that has involved criminal acts ( with one recent half-million dollar theft ending in four years in jail)- is another potential win for the beleaguered ratepayer.
The WACCC appears to also suggest that there should be improvement in the selection process of Local Government Area CEO’s with the possibility that it should be conducted under the auspices of the Public Sector Commission.
This is something that the Western Australian Local Government Association (WALGA) which recommends prospective CEO’s and attempts to manipulate all sorts of outcomes in its own self-interest may feel a little uncomfortable about, but has endorsed.
The West Australian Local Government Association :-
This organization’s submission shows its true colours. It is the colour of ratepayer’s money, the more of it the better without the possibility of any community getting more bang-for-its-buck in improved quality of service from its CEO or anything else for that matter.
It says “ Information around performance reviews of the CEO and senior staff should not be made available to the general public and should remain confidential under S.5.23(2)”.
WALGA considers the general public to mean ratepayers and appears not to want to defend junior staff at all.
There are too many to review so it is a small smattering hovering between the sublime and the ridiculous.
The West Australian Corruption and Crime Commission:-
Sadly, in the past, this august crime and corruption hunting body has tainted itself with some spectacular failures.
In fact at times it was laughable, prosecuting more of its own staff than others who are corrupt, and involving itself in pursuing cases which were blatantly unwinnable to a bitter and expensive dead end.
Allegedly-there were some undertaken just to hound persons of interest for purely vindictive reasons, with spite and malice thrown in- because the commission was made to look foolish and inept in its initial handling of the case.
The WACCC claims in its submission that it has invested substantial resources towards addressing serious misconduct in the local government sector.
Its known wins do not correlate well with investment being just ‘Serious Misconduct at the Shire of Exmouth’ and ‘Governance at the Shire of Dowerin’ in the past two years. That is just one a year.
However its assessment that the complexity of the nature of services provided, the amount of public and business engagement and the massive volume of public funds used can give rise to serious misconduct is correct.
The requirement for improving the accountability of both councillors and employees, the separation of powers between council and administration, much higher professional standards to be shown by elected members and the keeping of proper minutes of closed meetings for future review thereby providing for improved transparency- should be mandatory under the new Act.
The fact that the WACCC feels there is markedly insufficient performance monitoring of Chief Executive Officers leading to the risk of serious misconduct that has involved criminal acts ( with one recent half-million dollar theft ending in four years in jail)- is another potential win for the beleaguered ratepayer.
The WACCC appears to also suggest that there should be improvement in the selection process of Local Government Area CEO’s with the possibility that it should be conducted under the auspices of the Public Sector Commission.
This is something that the Western Australian Local Government Association (WALGA) which recommends prospective CEO’s and attempts to manipulate all sorts of outcomes in its own self-interest may feel a little uncomfortable about, but has endorsed.
The West Australian Local Government Association :-
This organization’s submission shows its true colours. It is the colour of ratepayer’s money, the more of it the better without the possibility of any community getting more bang-for-its-buck in improved quality of service from its CEO or anything else for that matter.
It says “ Information around performance reviews of the CEO and senior staff should not be made available to the general public and should remain confidential under S.5.23(2)”.
WALGA considers the general public to mean ratepayers and appears not to want to defend junior staff at all.
What WALGA should have come to grips with is the positive re-construction of
S.5.23(2), then its days of apparent protection of those who have the ability
to engage in serious misconduct, act unprofessionally and have no
qualifications to perform their duties will be over
What WALGA wants is to increase Confidentiality and reduce Transparency which will increase the ability, scale and timeline for local government corruption.
WALGA wants to lower the accounting standards required to be met by Local Government.
WALGA wants those that continually complain about rising shire rates, the poor standard of services, the lack of quality of councillors and administrators, the current general incompetent malaise and potential slow-but-sure financial collapse of some Rural Regional and Remote Councils to be declared Vexatious Complainants- and go unheard by decree.
WALGA claims it has had to step in to local government areas to provide capacity building, which means training. This is arguably why all standards, in so many Shires, are so low.
Shire of York.
It apparently has not presented a submission. Given all the current circumstances that is understandable.
Kevin Trent- Councillor the Shire of York.
It is as in-depth and cognitive as six paragraphs allow.
It could be defined as mediocrity at its best, extremely basic at its worst.
It really provides no clearly discernible solutions to the key problems unless you can read between the lines and there are so few of them.
Mr Trent ends his brief submission by stating that its content was his personal opinion. There are those who may ask why Mr. Trent did not keep his observations to himself.
Others may ask what submission has been put forward by this blog. There is none- other than dozens of letters of complaint on all serious matters concerning local government, including possible solutions, directed to all relevant Government Ministers and agency heads such as the Auditor General.
They have been read and responded to.
David Taylor.
Kevin Rudolf Trent needs to get his own shit together before he voices his ‘personal thoughts’ on the reformation of the LG Act. Compare Trent’s one page effort to a meticulously drafted one such as Dennis Grimwood’s submissions at 45 and 46.
ReplyDeleteAs if York is not enough of a clusterfuck already, to make matters worse we now have a lemon on board, a Deputy Shire President who purports to be a LG veteran, with letters after his name to boot.
I can think of a few letters to stick after his name, one begins with W and ends with R.
Trent needs to learn how to chair a meeting before shooting his mouth off. He also needs to smarten up and show some respect to the members of the community, the same members of the community who presumed, because of all his ‘been there, wrote the book’ rhetoric, he was going to be a worthwhile tick.
DeleteI noticed his comment about voluntary amalgamation and that in his opinion, it shouldn’t be prevented. Does he not know what a complete and utter balls-up SEAVROC was due to York’s inherent governance flaws, besides, who’s going to want to amalgamate with York, sacked and suspended twice in a decade.
ReplyDeleteAnd come on, he can’t be serious about the WALGA training, you might just as well send the councillors down to Perth zoo and stick um in the chimps cage, they’re going to learn a whole lot more.
I agree with Anonymous 17 May at 01:43, one page is pathetic.
I remember Kevin Trent as Deputy Mayor of South Perth, he wasn't particularly adept then, it sounds as though you good people of York have absolutely no luck when it comes to elected representation.
ReplyDeleteWasn't that crook James Best an ex South Perth mayor, must be something in the water down in the big smoke. Better watch this bloke Trent closely, is he a drinking buddy of Dicky Bliss by any chance.
DeleteKevin Trent would like to silence all ratepayers and prevent them from asking questions for one very good reason. He made a complete fool of himself when he acted as shire president just recently. His attempt to answer valid questions was deplorable and demonstrated very clearly just how stupid this man is. He is much like that half whitt Graham Simpson the multi titled and award winning WALGA stooge.
ReplyDelete