The Daily Examiner 17 October 2012:
THERE were tears and hugs in the public gallery at 7pm last night when Clarence Valley councillor Karen Toms was cleared of breaching the council's code of conduct.
It took councillors three hours, one of which was spent in private, to finally put an end to accusations the elected representative had acted wrongly in her dealings with a party that had held a contract for local swimming pools.
Two parties, the names of which were not revealed, complained Cr Toms breached the code of conduct by contacting a contractor….
About an hour later, Cr Margaret McKenna's recommendation that the council determine Cr Toms made no breach of the code of conduct and that the council review the report and procedures was supported by Crs Toms, Simmons, Challacombe and Baker with Crs Williamson, Howe, Hughes and Kingsley voting against….
What this newspaper report does not say is that more than a few local residents had a strong impression that a number of Clarence Valley shire councillors and senior council management thought that they had come together at the ordinary monthly meeting on 16 October 2012 to conduct a quick public lynching.
Three hours later this little noose party was in disarray and those watching from the ‘public gallery’ had heard concerns raised about the reliability of the contents of a 132 page confidential report for council's eyes only, due process, natural justice and a possible conflict of interest existing for some of those involved in consideration of Item 13.180/12 Conduct Review Committee.
All in all – a painful three hours for Cr. Toms and her family and a testing time for the newly-elected council.
4 comments:
What I liked was the widespread cynical laughter from the gallery when Deputy Manager Donges said he always told the truth.
I'm surprised you didn't come up with "sexist" or "misogynistic" as a reason for the attempted "lynching" of Cr Toms, ClarenceGirl.
Interesting to see Cr Baker was the strongest supporter of Cr Toms, perhaps you can now forgive him his failed business dealings?
Then again, given the so-called "evidence" was kept confidential, how can any ratepayer make a reasoned judgement? Seems local government is now headed down the slippery slope that state and federal have already descended!
Cr. Baker was not the strongest supporter of Cr. Toms.
That honour goes to the Lower Clarence community.
As for the evidence.
If yamabman had more than a superficial understanding of local politics and had bothered to follow original council minutes, past newspaper mentions and the reviewer's report posted on council's website this month, he would be able to understand what was going on yesterday.
And for those who don't know, the review link is http://www.clarence.nsw.gov.au/cp_content/resources/13.180-12_Conduct_Review_Ctee.pdf
Unfortunately, it doesn't identify the complainants, just the councillor, all a bit sinister in my view. Seems from my "superficial understanding" a major storm in a teacup where staff have their noses out of joint because a councillor dared to listen to complaints which we can assume were about them.
As for Cr Baker not being "the strongest supporter", he was reported as asking, or intending to ask, more than 50 questions of the GM, did someone else ask more?
Post a Comment