The Auditor General has released various reports which bemoan the fact that many Local Government Annual Reports and budgets generally lack transparency and relevance – that what they contain is often incomprehensible to the lay resident. We believe that Glen Eira excels in this area. Attempting to make sense out of the published figures is nigh on impossible. Admittedly, we’re not accountants. But that’s exactly the point if the Auditor General’s recommendations are taken seriously. One shouldn’t need a PhD in accounting or economics to be able to grasp what is really going on! Let’s take a few examples:
- In 2011 according to Council minutes (excluding Special Committees) there were 21 items considered in camera which contained the words ‘legal advice’. That is just under a quarter of all items listed for in camera. We further assume that many of these items consisted of external legal advice and hence would probably not be recorded under the category of Corporate Counsel in the budget.
- What is recorded in the 2011/12 budget under Corporate Counsel is the following: Expenses for the forecast year of $1,458,000 and an ‘income’ of $8,000
- As if this isn’t enough there is also the strange category of ‘Customer Service and Council Governance’. Exactly what this means is anyone’s guess, since most people would expect Governance to fall under the jurisdiction of the Corporate Counsel. Not so Glen Eira! The figures for this department are: Income – Zero! Expenses: $4,963,000.
- One most also query exactly what Customer Service means? Is this staff? Telephones? Little leaflets? etc.etc.etc.
So what we seem to have, apart from vague, obtuse categories, is nearly $6.5 million dollars expenditure and we really don’t know a thing about how, nor why this money is spent. All we know is that Glen Eira sure uses a hell of a lot of lawyers at the drop of a hat with no real accountability for their use. Come on councillors – it’s time budgets and Annual Reports really informed residents as to what is going on, and precisely how their money is being spent, rather than simply winning prizes for ‘presentation’! What’s required is a lot more substance and less camouflage.
Glen Eira Debates 
January 11, 2012 at 2:29 PM
Any Councillors wish to respond?
January 11, 2012 at 7:29 PM
What about you Rob – you’re an ex councillor so should know the ropes. Would be amazed if anything had changed since your time in council. Come on – tell us if you were ever really told where the dough ended up.
January 11, 2012 at 3:36 PM
The other major expense that the budgets and annual reports never seem to reveal is how much is spent on “consultants”. People have written about this in the past. For a council with 1000+ employees I wonder whether we really need to pay top prices for countless external consultants. I also expect to be able to find exactly how much is paid out for these consultants. Of course, those figures are buried somewhere in budgets and reports under categories that will never reveal their secrets. The only thing that’s clear is that none of this is probably listed where most people would expect to find such figures – under ’employees’. That is again another game of semantics since ‘consultants’ are not legally members of staff. I just want the truth. Plain, clear, understandable. How much does each sector earn, how much does it cost to operate and what’s the bottom line figure. I don’t want to read a report or a budget and scratch my head continually and ask “what does this mean” or “what does this refer to’? It should be perfectly understandable for 99% of the population. That it’s not is, I believe, more than coincidence. I’ll also support the comment about councillors explaining exactly their understanding of the finances. They’re the ones in the end who are making decisions on how the big money is spent so they should have the figures at their fingertips – that’s if Newton deigns to give it to them!
January 11, 2012 at 4:11 PM
Extract from Councils Website on the 2011-12 budget
“Average rates and charges will be $1,289 per property in 2011–12. This is equivalent to $25 per week. For every $100 of rates revenue received, Council delivers the following services:
$14 on footpaths, roads, drain and building maintenance;
$13 on recycling and waste;
$15 on parks and recreation;
$6 on libraries;
$6 on family and children services;
$8 on services to the aged;
$12 for all other services and government charges; and
$26 for capital works projects”
I’m thinking the legal fees on in the “all other category” and it seems to me that this Council would to well to scale back the all other category. How can the cost of “other” be so high and only marginally less than “footpaths, roads, drain and building maintenance” – methinks there is something drastically wrong here.
January 11, 2012 at 4:22 PM
This blog is complete c-ap.A brief perusal of Councils budget answers all questions asked. Further Council’s Accounts are prepared in accordance to Australian Accounting Standards subject to Internal and External Audit. The fact that you Glen Eira have no basic Accounting knowledge is what is at play here. Shame on your deliberate obfuscation of Facts.
January 11, 2012 at 5:04 PM
Most people who attempt to look at the budget wouldn’t agree with you Truth Addict. It is full of figures that just don’t add up and headings that are not only unclear, but I’d say deliberately obfuscating to use your word. I’d even go further and say that most of the councillors wouldn’t understand a word that’s in it. They’re reliant on Swabey and Newton and therein lies the real problem. Also please tell me how, if we’ve got such financial geniuses running the show, how on earth could we end up with a cash crisis and a rating of high risk? Someone must have stuffed up along the line somewhere.
January 11, 2012 at 8:51 PM
Dear Truth Addict – Could you please explain to me how the addition of building maintenance to the footpaths, roads and drains makes any sense? Footpaths, roads and drains are a separate item in the budget and clearly to enable residents to better understand the above split it would be better to keep them separate (wouldn’t cost much either).
Secondly Australian Accounting Standards applied to Councils’ vs private/public corporations are way, way different – as to how to correct this is a well documented issue within the accounting fraternity. Since these deficient Council applicable standards are those that are applied to both internal and external auditing procedures and processes then there is obvious room for improvement and questioning.
Surely if Council is to live up to its frequently claimed “open, transparent and accountable” claims then they should do better than the above website extract – not every resident is an accountant with knowledge of the accounting standards applied to Council. I submit most residents are familiar with perusing documents prepared within the confirns of private/public corporations accounting rules. It clearly is Councils responsibility to live up to its claims and provide documentation which is intelligible to the majority.
January 11, 2012 at 8:38 PM
Okay guys wishful thinking there, you are never ever going to get transparency from the power broker in Glen Eira, they are doing very well thank you very much. The only answer is to vote out the anti community Gang of 4 plus, sack Newton and make it clear that the secrecy game is over to the new CEO. It a tall order from a naturally conservative folk of Glen Eira that basically couldn’t give a stuff. As for most of the blogger here it will mean not voting Liberal pull-the-wool independent,s that say one thing to be elected but once elected crawl to Newton feet like lap-dogs.
January 11, 2012 at 10:08 PM
That still leaves the “independent” audit committee lapdogs of Gibbs and McLean to dispose of when Newton goes. Let’s have some true accountability of the important audit committee rather than the current joke we have now.
January 11, 2012 at 9:13 PM
Just thinking about the above Anon’s comment on the inclusion of building maintenance in with footpaths, roads and drainage. Got me thinking, just how many buildings does Council maintain – sporting pavillions, GE town hall, child care centres, maternity centres, Carnegie Library, Carnegie Pool to name but a few. Just what is included in the splits quoted on the Council website and how is one to decipher this or align it with the budget or annual accounts.
I’m betting that adding buidling maintenance to footpaths, roads and drainage does wonders (raising the $’s) for this category while simultaneously dropping the $’s in other categories. Mushrooms, we are mushrooms!!!!
January 12, 2012 at 9:57 AM
I will say it again so any fool can understand. This Council, like all others, is subject to External Audit by the Victorian Auditor General. All 79 Council’s submit their accounts to the AG’s Office and these accounts are all subject to the same Accounting Standards.You imbiciles are not insulting Glen Eira Council but a very respected Vic Government Office. Fools. For your information Building Maintanance is a perfect fit in that you are prolonging the life of a Depreciable Asset. Pick on something you have some knowledge of and leave the Accounting to the experts. Mr Newton is not a member of the Audit Committee, nor does this Committee answer to him( it is appointed by and reports to Councillors) nor is he an Internal or External Auditor. These Organisations verify the Accounts of Glen Eira Council and work for us. Leave Andrew alone.