Each candidate has received a personal letter from Andrew Newton informing them of the legal requirements if they are successful in becoming a councillor – ie. return of register of interests, etc. More importantly it contains a proposed schedule and the outline of an ‘induction’ program. We are of the opinion that this document also lays out the blueprint for stamping the administration’s authority and control on councillors.
Below is the proposed timeline. Important sections are highlighted. We draw readers’ attention to the following:
- The ‘invitation’ to sign the CURRENT councillors’ Code of Conduct on day one! There is no requirement in the Act for councillors to sign any such document! By signing councillors bind themselves prior to any discussion and possible amendment. Councillors also have three months to sign any Oath of Office. The legislation also requires that the Code of Conduct be ‘reviewed’ within one year of an election. Bayside starts its ‘review’ in February!
- The only ‘induction’ that councillors receive prior to the first Ordinary Council Meeting is a ‘folder’, part of one Assembly of Councillors, and then a nearly 3 hour ‘presentation’ on the Local Government Act from Maddocks. Then it’s off to make decisions! We imagine that at this first council meeting many important items will appear on the agenda for decision by a potential bunch of neophytes.
- Then we have the almost primary school flavour of the ‘kiddy tour’ (with sandwiches). Gesac, Duncan McKinnon, Caulfield Pavilion, are sure to feature prominently! Still no real ‘discussion’ or oversight of such things as community plan, council plan, local law, etc. Once again, Bayside conducts their ‘grand tour’ on the 16th March.
- Only on the 17th November, AFTER THE FIRST COUNCIL MEETING, is there an extended ‘induction’ period of 6 hours. Too late we cry!
For comparison we’ve also uploaded the full Bayside Program. Whilst we remain dubious as to the purpose of the little ‘one on one chats’ with individual councillors, we also note the specific reference to COUNCILLOR ONLY MEETINGS THAT ARE SCHEDULED in their program. The other point of course is the fact that Bayside sees no problems in publishing such material unlike Glen Eira.
Here is the Glen Eira ‘program’ –
Glen Eira Debates 
October 5, 2012 at 1:33 PM
This letter is entirely inappropriate. The election is conducted by the VEC and this should be the only body to contact candidates. Newton is right out of line. This is a political move.
October 5, 2012 at 2:43 PM
Get ’em before they wise up. They sign on the dotted line first which shuts them up then ya scare they shit outa them with Hayes who just happened to represent the mrc then set em loose to vote on what ya want rushed through. They won’t know if what hit me and already in your pocket. Love the tour bit too. Keep telling em how great and wonderful you are then why they can’t do this and that. Like taking candy from a baby.
October 5, 2012 at 2:48 PM
Shame Andrew Newton won’t let the residents see the provided folder which contains “info on Council, the role of Councillors and current council issues”. Having already had a session on standing for Council and gone through the whole election process, I would have thought those elected would be more intune with current council issues that the admin and that they would also be fully aware of what the role of Councillor entails.
To all those standing, first and foremost – the Administration reports to the elected Councillor’s. Much as this Administration would like to think otherwise it is enshrined in law.
October 5, 2012 at 5:05 PM
You must understand that it is important to “shape” the thinking of incoming councillors. No good having people with independant thinking. Never too early to start.
October 5, 2012 at 3:24 PM
To Glen Eira Blog – By the way, how did you get the contents of CEO’s letter?
Was it from one of the Camden Ward Councillors or die hard candidates from Tucker Ward. It would be interesting to know. There is every certainty that two people may have provided the letter – one Frank Penhullarick and the other Newton Gatoff who are favourites of this blog. Moderator, please don’t delete if you want to be seen as non partial.
October 5, 2012 at 4:56 PM
Dear Resident,
there are 30 odd candidates standing for election. It is most interesting that you select several councillors by name – none of whom FYI was our source! Secondly, this document is not confidential. Recipients are free to do what they wish with it. If it causes you and others some embarrassment, then we regard this as your problem alone!
October 5, 2012 at 5:03 PM
Be one of the last documents that they get that is not confidential.
October 5, 2012 at 5:18 PM
Any successful candidate would be well advised to steer clear of the “one on one” chat. Nobody should consider speaking to Andrew Newton alone – take a witness or ask if he minds if you record the conversation. No witness or no recording leave immediately.
October 5, 2012 at 5:19 PM
Geez incumbents and wannabe’s are out and about. Sunday a knock on the door from Okotel’s father. Today Esakoff. Who tomorrow?
October 5, 2012 at 7:07 PM
Autonomy, if you want it to stop just start asking some key questions on their platforms. Believe me word will spread between candidates and stooges and you won’t get another knock.
October 5, 2012 at 5:26 PM
Not sure of the purpose of the one on one chat is. But I would think the CEO and each Director should make a presentation to the post election Councillors which would then be followed by a question and answer section – much more informative and efficient. This one on one crap is already pulling the strings
October 5, 2012 at 9:56 PM
The scheduling of these events cannot be anything except deliberate. Full induction sessions should surely be a priority well before any vital council meeting where the newly elected are expected to make important decisions that could affect everyone.
The 7th November assembly or pre-meeting is a worry. Timing is set down for 6.45 until 7.30 when the full council meeting begins. That leaves barely three quarters of an hour to sort out the agenda items plus the “introduction to council”. Hardly sufficient I would say. The emphasis on the legalities for nearly three hours is fascinating when compared with this initial introduction. I would like to be as sure of winning lotto as I’m sure that this event is designed as much to limit councillors’ actions as it is to inform. The old shibboleths of councillor/officer domains will be emphasised and repeated so that the message of don’t interfere with officers is drilled in right from the start.
It’s all subtle and deliberate and does not actually serve the interests of residents .