This is a follow up to our previous post and again features the testimony of Peter Jones. Given his stated role as ‘minute taker’,  the following exchange makes for important reading we believe. Our previous formatting still applies.

 

MR GUNST:  If it’s convenient, sir, I’ve just got one more question on this very topic?

SENIOR MEMBER:  Yes, that’s in relation to the meeting in March I think my colleague was asking you about?—Yes, yes, it was March.

MR GUNST:  I’ve got one follow up question on that, sir, if I may?

SENIOR MEMBER:  Yes.

MR GUNST:  Have you still got the Tribunal book there?—Yes. 

Would you go to p.272, please.  If you look on p.272 to 273 do you see that’s a record of the assembly of councillors of 22 March 2011, the meeting that you’ve just been asked about?—Yes. 

And it tells us a meeting commenced at 6.45 with eight councillors present, one apology, Councillor Lobo and yourself, Peter Jones?—Yes. 

Then it’s got, “Matters considered, occupational health and safety”.  That’s the euphemism for Mr Newton’s bullying complaints, isn’t it?—Yes. 

Then that meeting adjourns at 7.40 and the meeting resumes at 7.45 in the presence of – and everybody’s there except Councillor Penhalluriak and Councillor Lobo again is an apology and Mr Newton’s there and you’re there as well, is that right?—That’s correct, yes. 

You were there, as you’ve said repeatedly, only as the minute taker for this assembly meeting on 22 March?—Yes. 

In particular in respect of the only item that was considered in that first session from 6.45 to 7.40?—Yes. 

The occupational health and safety issue?—Yes. 

You were only there as a minute taker you said?—That’s correct, yes. 

In fact you didn’t take any minutes, did you?—Some notes would have been taken of the meeting but these are the minutes of the meeting, yes. 

There was for nearly an hour, 55 minutes a meeting, it starts at 6.45, adjourns at 7.40 and the only matter considered is the occupational health and safety matter, as p.272 of the Tribunal book records?—Yes. 

This is the time where this bullying complaint is raised and Councillor Penhalluriak wants to know what it’s all about and he asks you and your response, so you say is, “I’m    just here as the minute taker”?—Yes. 

The meeting goes for nearly an hour and you are only there as the minute taker and you didn’t in fact take any minutes, is that the position?—The assembly of council that you have on page – – – 

SENIOR MEMBER:  There’s nothing in the minutes to suggest it was the occupational health and safety that was considered, is there?

MR GUNST:  It’s in the middle of p.272.

SENIOR MEMBER:  I know but that would be the second meeting, isn’t it?

MR GUNST:  I will clarify it with the witness but I don’t read it as that.  I read it as the meeting commenced at 6.45, persons present, one matter considered.

SENIOR MEMBER:  Yes.

MR GUNST:  And then it adjourns at 7.40, resumes at 7.45 and then has a number of matters, Optus telephone, Caulfield Racecourse, et cetera.  That’s as I read it, Mr Jones, is that a fair?—That’s correct, yes. 

Is that accurate?  Thank you.  So in that hour or 55 minutes only one issue is considered and you didn’t produce any minutes before this record, is that right?—That’s correct, yes, yes.  That’s the standard approach for council assembly – – – 

That was the one matter, sir.  I’m sorry to for taking you after – – –

SENIOR MEMBER:  Thank you.

<(THE WITNESS WITHDREW)

LUNCHEON ADJOURNMENT