Given that local government is potentially the most corruptible of all three tiers of government in Australia, it comes as no surprise that transparency is still resisted though it is very disappointing to see Clarence Valley Council searching about for an excuse not to do the right thing.
One of the risible objections to having Disclosures of Interest published online was that it would be difficult to redact staff signatures & residential addresses and, is "considered a waste of valuable staff resourcing" [Item 6c.19.090, CVC Ordinary Monthly Meeting, Minutes, 29 November 2019].
Another was a suggestion that councillors and staff may be at physical risk if declarations were published online, even though these declartions are already available for inspection at council offices and have been for some years.
Clarence Valley Independent, 11 December 2019:
Councillor Karen Toms has lodged a rescission motion to try and overturn a decision, made at the November Clarence Valley Council (CVC) meeting, which raised the ire of the NSW Information and Privacy Commission (IPC).
Councillors Lysaught, Ellem, Kingsley, Baker, Williamson and Simmons voted against uploading councillors’ and senior staff’s declarations of interest to the CVC website.
Following the decision, which was contrary to a guideline developed under the Government Information (Public Access) Act issued in September, Information Commissioner Elizabeth Tydd released a statement.
She said three local councils – Gosford City, Mid-North Coast and Clarence Valley – had “publicly stated their intention to adopt practices that appear to offend the requirements of the GIPA Act and Guideline 1”.
“The resolutions by councils, as they seek to deviate from clear requirements under the GIPA Act, [to] justify non-compliance for privacy reasons will be something I consider carefully,” she said.
“It is important to stress that the guideline was developed in consultation with the NSW Privacy Commissioner.”
She said the interests required to be declared by councillors and senior decision makers include business and pecuniary interests.
She said declaring these interests is “a demonstrably effective tool in preventing corruption and promoting integrity. “These are strong factors in favour of disclosure, particularly in the local government sector where decisions impact the everyday lives of people,” she said.
“Those factors must be balanced against factors against disclosure, including privacy. “However, declarations of business interests will not necessarily disclose any information impacting personal privacy.”
At the November CVC meeting, general manager Ashley Lindsay said: “…on behalf of staff and designated persons … I think it is unfair for them to have their information on the website.”
Councillor Greg Clancy suggested that any “sensitive information could be redacted”. “What’s the problem with having [the disclosures] on the website?” he said.
Mr Lindsay advised councillors that the recent Local Government NSW conference had resolved to support a motion by Mid-Coast Council, which “strongly objects to the [disclosures] … being published on any website”. “…We should support the Local Government NSW motion,”
Mr Lindsay said when answering a question from Cr Toms. “If unsuccessful, we can come back and change [CVC’s decision] and comply,” he said. Referring to the IPC guideline during debate on the matter, mayor Jim Simmons said it “may not be legislation” and that he thinks “there is some doubt … so I intend to vote for” not uploading the disclosures.
However, he said “if it becomes clear to me in the next day or two [that it is legislation] I’ll support a rescission motion”.
BACKGROUND
Information Access Guideline 1 - For Local Councils on the disclosure of information (returns disclosing the interest of councillors and designated persons) at https://www.ipc.nsw.gov.au/information-access-guideline-1.
 |
|
|
No comments:
Post a Comment