14
Harriott Street
YORK
WA 6302
6
December 2014
Hon.
Tony Simpson, MLA
Minister
for Local Government
8th
Floor, Dumas House
2
Havelock Street
WEST
PERTH 6005
Dear
Minister,
Local Government Act Section
8.15B(1)—Show Cause Notice, Shire of York
As
a resident and ratepayer of York, I have a number of concerns regarding the
above Notice. Some of those concerns are
reflected in the questions that follow. I
hope you will take the trouble to answer them.
Impartiality
1. The contents of the Notice seem to be based to a considerable extent on
complaints made to your department by two former shire presidents, Crs Tony
Boyle and Pat Hooper, and two former CEOs, Mr Ray Hooper and Mr Michael Keeble. The Notice seems to assume without question
or substantiation that their complaints have merit.
Did our current
shire president, Cr Matthew Reid, enjoy similar access to your department? If so, was what he may have said in his own
defence given the same degree of consideration as the views of those
complainants?
The Fitz
Gerald Report
2.
The Fitz Gerald Report alludes in detail to a broad range of alleged misconduct
on the part of several past and present councillors, a former CEO, other former
staff of the shire and a local businessman.
Those individuals stand variously
accused of systematic suppression of ratepayer dissent, vindictive persecution
of dissenters, cronyism, nepotism, favouritism, deceit, bullying, spreading
slander, misusing corporate credit arrangements, and failing to ensure the proper
accounting and management of Council funds.
This misconduct is alleged
to have occurred during the respective presidencies of Crs Hooper and Boyle and
while Mr Ray Hooper was CEO.
Is it the case that, during
that period, your department received complaints from York residents and ratepayers
about aspects of that alleged misconduct, but failed to investigate them or to
intervene in any significant way in the operations of the Shire Council? If so, why was that?
3.
Do you agree that your Department has a duty to investigate the
allegations contained in the Fitz Gerald Report—in particular, but by no means
only, those that allude to financial misconduct?
4.
If you do so agree, why have you limited your review of the governance
of the Shire to the activities of the current Shire Council headed by Cr Reid
and not extended it to cover previous years, perhaps as far back as 2008?
5.
Would you consider authorising an independent
and disinterested inquiry into the
procedures and activities of the York Shire Council, including matters raised
in the Fitz Gerald Report? If not, why
not?
6.
By suspending the Council, does your department aim to distract
attention from its past failure to act on ratepayer complaints?
7.
Further, does your department aim to protect persons adversely
mentioned in the Fitz Gerald Report from legal and political consequences that
might flow from their alleged misconduct?
8. It is rumoured that the WA Government has given tacit support to SITA’s
proposal to establish a landfill near York, and that an administrator, if
appointed, will be instructed to discontinue the Shire Council’s opposition to
the proposal.
Will you assure ratepayers
that the rumour is untrue?
9. In paragraph 2.2.1(3) of the Notice, you take Council to task for
failing ‘to properly manage and control the distribution of the Fitz Gerald
Report’.
I understand that some
unknown person or persons leaked the report to the public. There is no evidence
I know of that a councillor was responsible for the leak, or that Council as a
whole, or the Shire President, could have prevented it.
The Notice implies that the
report should have been withheld from circulation. How would withholding the report have benefited
the York community (other than those persons adversely mentioned in it)? What damage has our community suffered, or
might suffer, resulting from the report’s publication?
(Individuals who were targeted
by the very precise allegations contained in the report have the right of open
reply and rebuttal or to seek redress in the courts. So far as I know, nobody has pursued either course.
I find that surprising.)
10.
How would suppressing the report have squared with the principle of
open, honest and accountable local government, something York seems not to have
enjoyed for a good many years before the election of Cr Reid?
11.
In paragraph 2.2.1(6) of the Notice, you refer to ‘the standing down
and termination of CEO Hooper’. It is my
understanding that CEO Hooper tendered his resignation, which Council then
accepted. Which version of the story is
correct?
Public Question Time
12.
In paragraph 2.2.2.(1) of the Notice, you allege that the Shire
President and Council have accepted ‘inappropriate questions in relation to
staff and human resources matters’. Can you provide specific examples of such
questions, and explain how and why they were ‘inappropriate’? In this context, exactly what does
‘inappropriate’ mean? ‘Inappropriate’ in
relation to what?
13.
Would you agree that the purpose of public question time is to permit
members of the public to exercise their democratic right:
(a) to seek clarification of
issues that concern them;
(b) to offer
suggestions as to how Council funds might be applied;
(c) to raise
questions regarding aspects of Council’s activities, including the conduct of
councillors and staff; and
(d) to express support for,
or dissatisfaction with, the scope, direction, implementation and enforcement
of Council policies?
14.
If you do so agree, would you not also agree that what your Notice
implies is that the Shire President and Council should censor questions from the public—presumably including questions
that may be embarrassing to Council or staff, but are not malicious or
defamatory—rather than simply maintain order during public question time?
Conflict among Councillors and with former CEO Keeble
15.
Why was it ‘inappropriate’ for the Shire President and Council to use
the Shire’s audit committee to ‘conduct investigations into alleged financial
matters’ (paragraph 2.3.2)?
16.
What exactly was ‘inappropriate’ about the Shire President’s management
of debate in Council meetings (paragraph 2.3.3), bearing in mind that he has
been opposed and obstructed at almost every turn by certain other councillors
and, it is said, by former CEOs?
17. What exactly has been ‘inappropriate’ (2.3.4) about Cr Reid’s conduct
towards former CEO Keeble and administration staff? How has his conduct towards staff had the ‘potential
to cause significant industrial relations and welfare issues’ (2.3.5) for staff
other than Mr Keeble, whose own conduct towards Cr Reid is very much open to
question? Is there a single instance of
that ‘potential’ becoming actual?
18. Given the apparently toxic nature of the relationship of Mr Keeble and
certain councillors with Councillor Reid, it seems wise of Cr Reid to have made
audio recordings of his meetings with those individuals (2.3.6), although it would
have been wiser not to make them surreptitiously, if that is in fact what he
did.
Are you aware that on one of
those recordings Mr Keeble is allegedly to be heard ordering Cr Reid to sit
down and calling him ‘a fucking cunt’ in earshot of administration staff? Do you believe that is proper behaviour and a
proper use of language on the part of a local government CEO towards a shire
president, especially when other staff can easily overhear it? Would you not agree that such behaviour must
cast doubt on Mr Keeble’s credibility regarding accusations he may have made
against Cr Reid?
Since
becoming Shire President, Cr Reid has shown that he has a positive vision for
York and a determination to ensure that Council’s activities and proceedings
are open to public scrutiny. He has
strong community support, and consistent support from some of the other
councillors. I am confident that a
by-election resulting from the recent resignation of one of the councillors
opposed to him would give him clear majority support on Council. He would then have the chance to restore
community confidence in Council and develop policies directed towards a happier
and more prosperous future for our town.
Suspending
Council at this time would be very much a retrograde step and, judging from my
conversations with other ratepayers, an extremely unpopular one.
I am
not personally acquainted with Cr Reid.
However, I have seen and heard enough to have faith in his ability as
President of the York Shire Council to lead our community towards a brighter
future. Please, Minister, leave him to
get on with the job.
Yours
sincerely,
James Plumridge
(Dr) James V Plumridge, Ph D
cc Cr Matthew Reid
Hon. Colin Barnett, MLA
Hon. Mia Davies, MLA
Hon. John Hyde, MLA
