You are here
Local Government Amendment (Miscellaneous) Bill 2018 (No. 49)
Dr WOODRUFF (Franklin) - Madam Speaker, on behalf of the Greens I support
this Local Government Amendment (Miscellaneous) Bill. It contains a
substantial number of amendments. Given the number of councils in
Tasmania and the time it takes to reach agreement amongst the variety of
players in the local government sector, this is a comprehensive raft of
changes. It is very pleasing to see a number of them in particular,
having been a councillor on the Huon Valley Council, several of these are
overdue and very welcome.
I have had personal experience of the failings, the silence essentially,
of the Local Government Act in guiding council laws and councils about a
number of these issues. In some councils it has led to a certain amount
of heartache and pain. In other councils it has led to concern about
appropriate accountability measures and the fact that accountability has
not been able to be achieved because information has not been made
available or able to be made available. This appears to fix some of those
I want to point to a few of the changes in here. I do support clause 8
which amends section 28ZB, which relates to the dismissal of code of
conduct complaints on initial assessment and the inclusion of the words
'and trivial': Section 28ZB(1)(a) is amended to allow dismissal of a
complaint made to a code of conduct panel on the basis that the complaint
is trivial in addition to being vexatious. It has been my experience that
the code of conduct process can be used by some particularly pugnacious,
aggressive councillors who end up having highly personal relationships
with other councillors that boil into a series of code of conduct
complaints that are used as a type of attack on a councillor, a weapon
essentially, to bog people down in endless paperwork.
I have seen it used a number of times against women who speak up and do
not toe the line. They can be used in a vexatious way and they can be
used on utterly trivial matters. It is painful, annoying and time
consuming so I am very pleased to see the end of that process and the
possibility of the empowerment of the code of conduct panel to dismiss a
complaint on the basis that the complainant has not made a reasonable
effort to resolve the issue that is the subject of the complaint.
I would like the minister's view on situations that I have observed where
a complaint has been made against another councillor who is aggressive,
pugnacious and difficult. I have seen people behaving incredibly rudely
in workshops, unbelievably rudely in closed council workshops, because
there is no-one else around except other councillors. In that situation
where a person is behaving badly and is not inclined to be reasonable, it
can be intimidating for a councillor to try to resolve an issue. I hope a
person would not be expected to try to resolve a situation with a person
who has presented themselves, particularly in front of other councillors
in a workshop, as not wanting to change the way they speak to that person.
What are your views about what would be required in that situation?
I had another question in relation to clause 14. This amends section 55(2)
of the act by omitting the current section and replacing it with a new
section which provides that a general manager must advise the councillor
of any employees or general manager's interests. The general manager must
keep a register of any such interests and it sets a maximum penalty for a
breach of that section of 10 penalty units.
What happens with the register of an employee's or general manager's
interests? What is its purpose? Is it to record and then be put away?
We have had conflicts of interest in other situations in government where
registering a conflict of interest is not enough to satisfy that the
conflict is not misused. If a general manager has a register of conflicts
with employees would that mean that the senior planning officer must not
make a planning determination in relation to the people on the register?
Or would it mean that person must not be on an interview panel because
they have an interest?
Mr Gutwein - It would depend on what that interest was.
Dr WOODRUFF - Yes. Presumably it means some action will happen on some
I am pleased to see that clause 15 amends section 56B of the act so that
the gifts and donations register will be available for public inspection
at council offices and on the council's website, and would be updated at
least monthly. That is in line with other changes being made across
I am pleased to support clause 28 which amends section 228 of the act in
relation to confidentiality so that board of inquiry documents or records
used by the Director of Local Government for the purposes of an
investigation would not be exempt from the Right to Information Act. The
Government should take on board the fact that there is an exemption in the
Right to Information Act for decisions made by a minister that are
delegated to a secretary or to another senior member of government are not
to be made available to the public.
That is a flaw, a loophole, an exemption, which the Premier has publicly
acknowledged and the Ombudsman says should be changed. The Ombudsman
cannot investigate the appropriateness of actions taken because the Right
to Information Act prevents them from having any jurisdiction over those
sorts of decisions and processes. It is not in the state's best interests
when decisions are delegated to senior public servants so they cannot be
available for public scrutiny under Right to Information. It is an abuse
of the public's right to assess and scrutinise the decisions of everyone
in state government just as much as local government. We support this
clause and ask that the minister takes the same issue on board at the
Clause 35 amends section 339F, regarding the customer service charter.
This means the councils' customer service charter must be reviewed within
12 months of a council election. It is important that new councillors
must engage with the customer service charter for their council. That is
a welcome addition because the way councillors frame the relationship
between their council and ratepayers is incredibly important.
Clause 36 which amends section 340A clarifies that a councillor will not
be entitled to allowances if they are suspended because of a performance
improvement direction that has been issued under another part of the act.
That is an entirely appropriate arrangement. It clarifies a difficult
situation where this is all about putting in place a framework to
encourage people to behave ethically.
Madam Speaker, what is missing from this bill is an amendment about the
cost of boards of inquiry. It is thoroughly unjust and outrageous that
the state government levies the costs of boards of inquiries onto the
council communities for which they have ordered an inquiry to occur.
We have had two very expensive inquiry processes in Tasmania. The cost of
those inquiries has been levied on the communities, who can ill afford
them. I can only speak in relation to the Huon Valley. The minister does
not like to hear it but the failure of his department, the Director of
Local Government's Office, to act early enough on consistent and
persistent complaints of misconduct and other corrupted processes in the
Huon Valley Council led to a level of internal dysfunction that resulted
in a board of inquiry having to be called. It was a case of failing to
discipline people's behaviour. It encouraged them to continue to behave
badly. It is totally unreasonable for communities to have to bear the
cost of the state government failing to do its job of resourcing and
providing the Director of Local Government with whatever is required to
undertake thorough investigations, so that these things can be flushed out
before it leads to a level of dysfunction and things falling apart within
I acknowledge these changes to the Local Government Act will have involved
many conversations with LGAT and throughout councils in Tasmania and with
the staff in the department who have brought this altogether. As someone
who has been on council, I look forward to the new batch of councillors,
who have recently been elected, having tighter legislation to work within.
Everyone in the state would be happy about that.