Tonight’s Special Committee Meeting continued the tradition of secrecy within Glen Eira council. After five minutes the gallery was cleared for in camera discussions on the following agenda items – which finally made it onto council’s website this afternoon. (Please note that the minutes of the first meeting are still wafting about but not in the public domain!)
This time round, the agenda items have really outdone themselves – they read:
“That the meeting be now closed to members of the public under Section 89(2) of the Local Government Act 1989 in order to consider any confidential business.
6.1 under s89 (2) (a) ‘personnel’ and (d) ‘contractual’ of the Local Government Act which relates to the review of the performance of the Chief Executive Officer.
6.2 under s89 (2) (f) ‘legal advice’ which relates to Right of Reply.
6.3 under s89 (2) (f) ‘legal advice’ in order to consider a Council resolution.
6.4 under s89 (2) (f) ‘legal advice’ in order to consider seeking further legal advice.
6.5 under s89 (2) (a) ‘personnel’ in order to consider OH&S matters.”
Some very strange goings on here. For example:
- CEO (re)appointment is integrally linked to the Performance Appraisal. These should not be linked and we hazard a guess that no other council does link the 2 issues.
- OH& S has again reared its ugly head and is playing a pivotal role in the appointment process since we assume this relates to Newton’s bullying claims and the exclusion of Penhalluriack.
- Of further concern is the multiple ‘legal advice’ items. Are they ‘separate matters’ or related? Are ratepayers therefore looking at another possible $15,000 gifted to lawyers?
- The farce is even further accentuated with the ‘legal advice in order to consider seeking further legal advice’. This line could have come straight out of Monty Python for its sheer anarchic insanity. Oh to be a lawyer in the employ of Glen
Eira City Council – one is laughing all the way to the bank! - Seems like they can’t even decide if a Council resolution is legal or not! Surely this should have been nutted out BEFORE the resolution was put and carried? We again wonder if this item is related to the legality of the first Special Committee and
hence the need to revoke the delegation powers and substitute them with the current one? As Lipshutz and Hyams keep telling us – ‘a little housekeeping’ – except that the costs keep adding up for ratepayers! - And one little issue that again won’t be made public – are any of these legal eagles part of Maddocks perhaps? Will Tang actually deign to declare a (potential) conflict of interest? We remind folks that in the past he has declared a conflict of interest on a Monash matter since he is merely one out of 40,000 students who attended the university! Should we expect consistency though?
- Finally, facts suggest that dealing with Newton becomes a very, very expensive business. We still don’t know how much the 2005 schemozzle cost ratepayers, and the figure for 2009 is roughly $40,000. How much this current saga, with all the investigations of bullying, lawyers, and now more lawyers will eventually cost, is anyone’s guess.
Before we list the night’s events we believe it is worth pointing out that all motions were passed unanimously. One has to wonder at all these sudden ‘conversions’ when the vote at last week’s meeting to create this committee was 5 to 4! It’s good to see that public displays of ‘unity’ are valued far more highly perhaps than consistency, and dare we suggest, integrity! But as they say, a week’s a long time in politics.
The night’s events (in chronological order):
- Motion to accept (non-public) minutes
- Kerfuffle about apologies (Lipshutz absent). Tang played lawyer and brought up a ‘point of procedure’ and insisted that a formal motion be put to accept Lipshutz’s absence – after the meeting had again moved on. Esakoff realised her mistake and backtracked to this motion. Incidentally, dear readers, what is a ‘point of procedure’ – does it even exist? or did Tang really mean ‘point of order’? And are these councillors running so scared of legal retribution that they are determined to dot every ‘i’ and cross every ‘t’ – just in case?
- Motion to move in camera. Gallery cleared. World record of less than 5 minutes!
Glen Eira Debates 
October 21, 2011 at 7:12 AM
If the meetings are confidential you cannot expect to see the minutes until there is an outcome of the confidential item. That is not unreasonable.
If they were to publish minutes halfway through their deliberations it would not be confidential. To have so many meetings over what appears to be one item is quite strange.
October 21, 2011 at 9:24 AM
Not so. Minutes are to be signed off by the chairman. The Racecourse special committee managed to get their minutes up. Not everything is ‘confidential’. Oaths were read, and motions to move into secrecy were also done. This part of the meeting was open and the minutes should record it and be available for the public in just the same way that the racecourse was. They won’t have any detail just the items that were discussed in secret and not the outcomes if they don’t want to. All this still doesn’t explain why the agenda of the first meeting disappeared quick smart and the minutes won’t go up. There’s no trace of any meeting then for the public. There’s no law which says that minutes have to be secret. This is just glen eiras way of doing things.
I’m also smelling a rat because the minutes of the last council meeting didn’t include the real schedule for the set up of the first special committee. They’ve got to be hiding something if they make everything else public but not this.
October 21, 2011 at 10:09 AM
The mixing together of performance appraisal, OH &S, and the range of legal advice is extraodinary. Legal advice in an appointment I would have thought comes after the decision to advertise or appoint. Then there is legal involvement in the contract negotiations. Performance appraisal shouldn’t be mixed up with deciding whether to advertise or reappoint. Appraisal has influence on the decision but this appraisal needed to be done independently and months before any decision is made. Under these conditions it means that Penhalluriack is excluded from this aspect too. Next there’s the safety issue tied in as well. Once more, it’s irregular and superfluous. I would have thought that there are plenty of laws which govern this without tying it directly to the appointment. The target is again Penhalluriack and maybe a series of trumped up charges that again keep him out of voting.
The way that this committee has been set up, the schedule and membership is more than contentious. I’m on the outside looking in and all I can see is manipulation and councillors acquiescence and compliance with Newton’s wishes. This galls me the most. With 8 councillors and the possibility of a split vote that means that Esakoff gets a second vote. That’s not democracy. It’s Newton and the gang working behind the scenes to get him what he wants. I just wonder if it’s ever entered into their heads what’s good for the community, rather than what’s good for themselves?
October 21, 2011 at 12:30 PM
Hyams has criticised this blog in several forums for not knowing what they’re talking about. Everyone makes mistakes. Even councllors such as Hyams no doubt. If mistakes and errors have been made then I’d point the finger not at the interpretations but at Hyams and the mode of communication of this council. When events continue to be held in secret and thus the community has no idea of what is going on, nor why, then the blame must be laid at the feet of council and not residents and their criticisms. Communication should provide clear explanations of why something is done and the processes that are legally mandated. This isn’t the way of this council. It and its members prefer to do things in their idiosyncratic way. As a consequence all criticisms, questions, and allegations levelled against them are warranted, and probably 100% accurate. The recent post on the Whelan Report made mention of the dissatisfaction with communication and consultation. The same problem still exists. If councillors don’t care enough and don’t abide by the overall objectives to govern for the people, then the flack that comes their way is perfectly justified. It’s even more of an indictment on such councillors as Hyams, Lipshutz, Esakoff and Tang who have been there long enough to know better.
October 21, 2011 at 1:28 PM
Has anyone bothered to ring and asked them what’s going on,
it maybe a course of action.
October 21, 2011 at 2:06 PM
Come off it! Do you fair dinkum expect that anyone will tell you anything? All you’ll get is the standard Esakoff/Hyams line – “it’s confidential, so can’t say a bloody word”.
October 21, 2011 at 5:17 PM
Smart Alec, you appear to have the franchise on good governence. They say it is condidential because that is what it is. Supposing you were a councillor what would you do? Run around telling everyone about matters that had been deemed to be confidential. You never knock Magee or Lobo for not telling everyone about what they are doing.
I hope you are preparing to run for Council next year.
October 21, 2011 at 5:49 PM
What a fab idea – but only if Newton and Burke are chucked out on their ear. Then we’d start getting the kinda council we should have.
Governance. Shucks, no one expects confidential stuff to be put on the public speaker. What I do expect is that not everything ends up as confidential cos Newton prefers it that way. Perfect example is the reappointment and reappointment and reappointment of Gibbs & McLean. Jeez, no other council treats this as secret. They’ve got media releases announcing stuff like this. They also advertise properly and don’t hide things away in a two inch ad in the Age or on a website where no one is likely to look. That isn’t open and transparent. That just doing the absolute minimum as required by law. Nothing more. For good measure wouldn’t a nice little statement that says sorry people we might have stuffed up a little with the first special committee so here’s the second one and we’ve finally got it right but we can’t say a word about anything because it’s all very very top secret even the bullying which everyone knows is going on and please forget about making the first lot of minutes public since we don’t really have to. Just forget all about it since it’s now in the past and we’re sorry if we’re trying to pull the wool over your eyes but that’s the only way we can work. Please people forget about us spending all this money on panel reports when we really didn’t have to it’s just money and what the heck we’ve got millions and zillions and it’s not ours so don’t bother yourselves about it. Trust us we know what we’re doing and it’s all for your good.Wait and see what a boon the c60 will be. you will all stop using your cars cos the roads are clogged so our environment is saved. See this was the strategy all the time. We’ve environmentally so conscious.
Don’t believe the propaganda that’s spreading how useless and divided we are. Okay we might have had a few rotten councillors in the past who used their phones too much and who gave andrew a really hard time but 3 inspections sorted out this mess and now with another maybe half dozen or so we’ll sort out penhalluriack good and proper this time and magee and lobo won’t open their moths cos they know what’s good for them if they want to get re-elected next time. so everything’s hunkey dorey. We will continue along as we always have and the dumb populace won’t know anything about anything. Oh forgot to mention – rates will continue going up for the next 50 years cos we’ve gotta pay for gesac and all the lawyers involved in this little escapade.
Hey Anon – is this your idea of good governance?
October 21, 2011 at 8:14 PM
Well played mate. You win