When residents ask public questions then they have every right to expect that the responses they receive and signed by the Mayor will constitute the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Far too often, this is not the case. Our latest example concerns another public question from last week’s council meeting. We will break this down so that it is easier for readers to follow – ie. the question, followed by the response and then the photographic evidence which belies what council claims. This will occur over several posts and all relate to the Elster Creek Trail.
Question 1 – Given the Noel Arnold recommendations on the handling of mulch materials, why have council employees not adhered to these recommendations when carting, laying, and spreading the mulch – especially the requirement to wear masks, gloves and goggles?
Answer – Staff and contractors are trained in the safe handling of mulch and use appropriate personal protective equipment for the nature of the works.
COMMENTS: The Noel Arnold report stated:”Based on a literature review of the health and safety risks associated with composts, soil conditioners and mulches, and the warnings applied to commercially available mulch, users may still be potentially exposed to bacteria and fungi….”. Please note: Council has admitted this mulch was ‘commercial’. It lay in huge piles fermenting and emitting steam prior to being spread. Further, the Arnold report made these recommendations: “To protect staff from potential risks, provide training, instructions, information and appropriate personal protective equipment to Council employees likely to come in contact with this material. The personal protective equipment that is recommended for Council employees handling the mulch material is: disposable dust mask; gloves; washing of hands after use”.
The photos clearly show that NONE of these safety precautions were employed. Who is responsible? What oversight was taken by those in charge? Why is the response to the question so dissembling if not a straight out porky? Note – as an admitted ‘commercial’ mulch, this comes under Australian Standards and hence is arguably more ‘dangerous’ than mere leaf and chip mulch! Not only has Council failed to adhere to the Arnold recommendations – they have ignored the Australian Standards thereby potentially putting their employees at risk.
If readers click on the image they will see the piles of mulch waiting to be spread. There are many other photos not included here.
Glen Eira Debates 
July 28, 2012 at 11:28 AM
Well done Glen Eira. A picture is for sure worth every thousand words that this council uses to hide the truth.
July 28, 2012 at 12:34 PM
Responses to public questions have been turned into an art form by Burke and other possible authors of such responses. All residents ever want is straight, direct and honest answers. They rarely get this. Compounding the deceptions we have the councillors – sitting there biting their tongues and maybe feeling embarrassed. Hardly ever does anyone have anything to say. Even when questions are directed to individual councillors the responses (not answers) are verbatim from each of the councilors. I distinctly remember councillors being asked for their views on the frisbee affair and the diversions were incredible. How they can sit there and allow mistruths to go out in their name is mind blowing.
July 28, 2012 at 3:59 PM
Reprobates comments have made me have aother look at the councillor code of conduct. One bit is important. “4.1.3 avoiding statements (whether oral or in writing) or actions that will or are likely to mislead or deceive”. What we’ve got here from Hyams and his ghost writers is without a doubt intended to “mislead and deceive”. Off to the councillor conduct panel with you Mayor Hyams.
July 28, 2012 at 5:56 PM
Actually, Colin, you could write a huge list to be submitted for Hyams, Lipshutz and Esakoff to go to the Councillor Conduct Panel. A good starting place start would be Lipshutz’s statements re the condition of the Esakoff property featured in the infamous heritage issue.
Or then again how about Pilling, Hyams, Lipshutz and Esakoff on their statements of the good a deal they got with on site parking for the infamous C60 development (higher that average for a comparable development) when in fact it’s the same parking as for any apartment block going up in Rosstown Road.
July 28, 2012 at 9:17 PM
Are you sure Glen Eira Employees spread the mulch as opposed to a private contractor?
July 28, 2012 at 10:36 PM
Irrelevant – contractors are under the same obligations re health/risk as permanent employees.
July 29, 2012 at 8:50 AM
If this mulch was of “commercial quality” what was the cause of it’s incredible stink? For well over a month it smelt like it came from the tip.
July 29, 2012 at 11:27 AM
The answers also include a bit about spreading the mulch to protect trees. Can’t see a single tree anywhere where this bloke is spreading the mulch. Just putting more on top of existing woodchips. Probably too much to ask for them to use their heads and remove the old stuff and letting grass regrow. Nope, looks better to have a big patch of nothing.
July 29, 2012 at 10:34 PM
Glen Eira it is relevant because if it was a contractor, and by the way it was, then the lack of safety is the contractors fault and not Councils.
July 30, 2012 at 10:49 AM
agree. Just done a H & S course and this is the case. If this was the case every road being built would need council supervising the companies that the work has been outsourced to do. It is the companies responsibility to look after the H & S of its workers. It is a ridiculous post anyway as 99.99% of gardeners would not use gloves, masks and goggles to spread mulch. It is one consultants opinion only and they have to say something to earn there money. It is funny making mulch out to be a substance as bad as asbestos yet ignoring the issue of horses and people cohabitating in Caulfield. I would have thought Hendra virus was more of an issue considering people will be using the same tunnel as horses to access a ‘car’ park in the middle of the racecourse.
July 30, 2012 at 11:10 AM
“Staff and contractors are trained in the safe handling of mulch and use appropriate personal protective equipment for the nature of the works” That’s the answer and from the photo it’s not true. Focus on that.
July 30, 2012 at 11:30 AM
well the council will need a lot more workers then to supervise all the contractors doing all the roadworks, mulching and building etc. They are not require by law to do this. I hope the anonymous of the world do not mind paying higher rates. Mine are high enough thank you very much.
August 2, 2012 at 11:03 AM
The photo shows somebody walking on a path!
July 30, 2012 at 6:56 PM
From the very beginning, the debate around the mulch heap got hijacked by some councillors and council officers who were determined that the public record would be distorted in a way that would allow them to say “its safe”. There is no such thing in real life. There are risks, and there are strategies to manage risk [meaning to reduce risk to an acceptable level, where “acceptable” is a political decision].
The Noel Arnold report didn’t disclose all the risks, didn’t quantify the risks, didn’t assess the extent of the mitigation that the recommendations might provide, didn’t even identify the at-risk members of the community [typically people who are immuno-compromised, such as the very young, people undergoing chemotherapy, asthmatics, elderly, HIV sufferers] other than to state that young children rarely contracted Legionella. It specifically didn’t discuss virulence or transmissability.
As it happens, every year several Victorians do die from the kinds of nastiness that lurk in soil and woodchips, but its rare. That just means the deaths are numbered in the 10s. There are also the people who suffer from long-term adverse health outcomes. Cryptosporidiosis, aspergillosis, MU [aka Bairnsdale ulcer], meningitis…they’re not pleasant. Healthy people should have substantial immunity to all these, which is why adverse effects are rare, but they’re still non-zero.
The Ombudsman and our Mayor did only one person a favour by trivialising the health risks. They have their supporters I know, but they’re not the ones explaining to a distressed family the death of a loved one 4 days after admission to hospital.
July 30, 2012 at 9:37 PM
Hell of a sobering comment Reprobate. Whatever spin is put on all this, Newton is there to make sure that risk is adequately assessed and mitigated. He hasn’t done this. For two years nothing was done and Penhalluriack and the farcical conflict of interest became the convenient scapegoat. Now the latest posts on the elster trail tell us exactly the same thing. Risk isn’t being managed. It’s quite revealing that part of the public question which Glen Eira hasn’t put up asked council if they can guarantee that there is no risk to the public or workers. This question wasn’t answered!
Now there’s the huge fanfare about reopening the mulch heap instead of finding another site for it. Councillors had better pray like hell that no child gets sick and the parents decide to sue.
Anyone ever watched the guys with their woodchipping machine and dust flying everywhere. They don’t wear goggles! These are accidents waiting to happen.
July 30, 2012 at 9:27 PM
More people die in the first 10 years from exposure to wood chips than from mesothelioma exposure to asbestos. That’s a fact jack.
August 2, 2012 at 11:01 AM
Rubbish…absolute garbage .. more scare tactics Penhallurick ???…
No recorded death by mulch .EVER !
My Uncle died from Asbestos poison and i find it highly offensive to trivializes this
August 2, 2012 at 11:39 AM
the most bizarre claim I have heard as well. I spose the difference is Frank doesnt sell asbestos he sells mulch! the free mulch means less profit for him
July 30, 2012 at 11:10 PM
Why was themulch heap ever moved from Caulfield Park anyway?
It seemed to be in a safer location…not immediately next to a childrens’ playground and a secondary college.
But oh it is easy to see the children from the crowded flats (built on the former council depot) opposite the horse stables in Neerim Road do not need good quality air or a quiet time away from the rail gates and nor do the children at Glen Eira Secondary College because their parents are poorer than those who use private colleges like most of the councillors’ children have attended with large playing field and fresh air. For their lunchtime it is not important that they breath in the fumes from this rubisshy mulch heap which is only metres from their playground.
July 30, 2012 at 11:17 PM
Mulch borne diseases are very hard to diagnose. I know a non-gardener who is hoping for a cure with serious medication. DID HE VISIT GLENHUNTLY PARK TOO OFTEN? To identify the disease many unpleasant and intrusive lung examinations were conducted and 17 specialists met and discussed the symptoms of the gentleman’s health. Everyone only hopes he can be cured. He lives in Camden Ward.
August 1, 2012 at 10:17 PM
Has council considered the possibility of people using it as a place for convenience dumping of a product such as asbestos as has happened in another municipality. This wonderful product has now been distributed to Kindergartens, schools and parks and people are suffering greater consequences than if it were mulch. The council concerned is now on an exercise of tryting to recall all the mulch whoch they made available and which it admits was dumped on an unsupervised mulch deposit area such as the beautiful Glen Eira one andnow residents there are suffering.