It's called turning a blind eye

After being informed about the issues raised in the post below this one, I went along to the Council  Meeting on Thursday 26 of March and used public question time to ask the President, Mr Pratico what he did when a Shire employee informed him late last year that illegal activities were taking place at the Shire depot.  This is a transcript of his answers, and some given by the CEO, Mr Clynch. The answers  surprised me.  They might surprise you too. 

My questions to the President   re; former Shire employee Kevin Edsall

11.    In late November last year, when then Shire employee Kevin Edsall, who was the fleet manager at the depot, approached you at the Agricultural Show and reported the theft of steel beams from the Shire Depot by a fellow employee, what action did you take?

President: “When that was reported to me, the matter had already been reported to the CEO previous to that, so I made the CEO aware of the theft.”

My follow up: Do you know…what was the outcome?

 “The CEO  attended to it and the material was returned.”

22.    When Mr Edsall reported to you that his colleagues at the depot had cut down a jarrah tree on crown land and were using Shire supplies and equipment in work hours to construct a recreational amenity, that is an enclosed deck, for themselves on Shire property at the depot, what action did you take?

President: “I think that the Manager of Works was aware that enclosure being built, so there was no action for me to take.”

My follow up: Do you know whether a building permit was sought or obtained for the structure which was built?

Answer from CEO: “No, my understanding is that a building permit was not required for that work."

Why was that?

CEO: “I just made the inquiry and that was the response I got.”

33.    When Mr Edsall later reported to you that not long after him raising the previously mentioned issues, one of his colleagues at the depot had presented him with a spent .22 calibre bullet shell at his workplace, what action did you take?

President: “He… when I questioned why he was presented with that, his response was the Shire employee who presented it said he found it.”

Follow up: Did you not see that as a case of bullying or intimidation in the workplace?

President:  “As Shire President, if it was a case of bullying, or if Mr Edsall felt it was bullying, he should have gone to his superior in the workplace, which was the Manager of Works."

I believe he did report it, but what was your reaction?

"I do not believe it is the Shire President’s role to interfere in operational matters.”

Answer from CEO: "I conducted an investigation into that matter and arrived at a conclusion that there was no…"

What was your finding?

"I decided there was no case of bullying in that situation."

One set of rules for Council staff (none), and another set of rules for the rest of us mugs

Some time last year, the boys up at the Shire depot decided the confines of their lunch room were a little too restricted, so they cut a hole in the wall, chopped down a nearby jarrah tree and went to work cutting it up (mostly during work hours) and building themselves a patio entertainment area.

Apparently its a fabulous place to enjoy all the free beers donated to the work crews by grateful members of the community who get their roads graded regularly or their verges cleared.

A few small problems with this, though...

1. It is illegal to chop down trees without a clearing permit
2. It is  illegal to erect a structure like this without a building permit
3. It is highly inappropriate to use Council-owned equipment and materials during work hours for an unbudgeted expense like this.
4. It is unethical for public servants to accept free cartons of beer for doing their job.

You would expect someone like Shire President Tony Pratico to be aware of the points outlined above and to take strong action if he was informed about something like this, but sadly, you would be wrong.

At last night's Council meeting I asked him what he did when he was told about the situation by a worker at the depot who didn't like what was going on.

The President's reply: "The Manager of Works told me he was aware of that being built, so I took no action."

I then asked whether a building permit had been sought or obtained for the structure.

Council CEO Tim Clynch replied: "I was told no building permit was required."

Wait a minute...  He was told?  As the CEO and a former town planner, surely he knows the rules regarding building permits?

So if you and I, fellow citizens and ratepayers, wanted to cut down a native tree for some timber, we'd need a permit and if we wished to extend our dwellings and build patios, we'd need a permit.

But in the Shire of Bridgetown-Greenbushes, if you are council employees the rules apparently do not apply.

Employment conditions are secret, apparently

I recently rang the Council and asked to see a copy of its Collective Employee Agreement.

Many other WA Councils make their employment agreements available on the via their websites. Not ours -- far from it -- as you will see from this email exchange:

From: Tim Clynch [mailto:tClynch@bridgetown.wa.gov.au]
Sent: Wednesday, 11 March 2015 2:26 PM
To: Michael Southwell (southy@iinet.net.au)
Subject: Request for Information

Hi Michael

Emily from the front counter has referred to me your request for a copy of the Shire’s collective employee agreement.

Please note the Shire currently has a collective employee agreement for the outside works staff and an enterprise bargaining agreement for inside staff. 

With regard to your request for copies of either one or both of these agreements I have referred to Section 5.94 of the Local Government Act. 

An employee collective agreement is not a document defined under Section 5.94 as being available for inspection by the public.  Therefore there is no automatic right to access that information.

Both agreements were considered by Council at its June 2013 meeting as confidential items “behind closed doors”.  Therefore the contents of each Agreement are considered confidential and are not available for inspection by members of the public.

Based on the above I am not able to provide you with a copy of either one or both of the agreements.

If you are dissatisfied with my decision you are able to request consideration under Freedom of Information legislation.  Application forms can be obtained from the Shire’s Records officer Eileen Kneale.  Under the FOI legislation if your FOI application is declined by the Shire appeal rights would be available to you.

Regards

Tim Clynch
Chief Executive Officer
Shire of Bridgetown-Greenbushes

From: Michael Southwell [mailto:southy@iinet.net.au]
Sent: Thursday, 12 March 2015 11:09 AM
To: Tim Clynch
Subject: RE: Request for Information

Hi Tim,

In arriving at your decision to keep this document secret, did you consider Council’s stated Values, which include being “open and accountable”?

The fact that the document was considered as a confidential item at Council does not support your argument that it is secret, given that the decision to consider it behind closed doors would have occurred at your suggestion.

Similar documents are publicly available at other Councils.  Perhaps you should check with the Department on whether the document should be publicly available, as you have on other issues.

I should not be made to go through the time and expense of an FOI request, when there is no good reason to keep the document secret.

Regards,

Michael

Hi Michael

Once an item is accepted by Council as confidential under Council’s Standing Orders I am not permitted to release the information to the public.

Section 5.94 of the Local Government Act lists the local government information available for public inspection.  An employee collective agreement or similar is not identified as a document freely available for inspection.

Prior to making my decision I did consult with the Department of Local Government and Communities and their advice was that the document was not of a type that would normally be freely available to the public but at the end of the day the decision to release it rested with the CEO.  As stated previously, as the matter was considered by Council behind closed doors I am not authorised to release it for public inspection.

The Local Government Act identifies the types of matters that can be considered by a council behind closed doors, one of which is “a matter affecting an employee or employees”.  An employee collective agreement or EBA is such a document.

I am happy to stand by Council’s values of being open and accountable but I also am obliged to work within the requirements of the Local Government Act, other legislation, Shire of Bridgetown-Greenbushes Local laws and Council Policies.

Regards

Tim Clynch
Chief Executive Officer
Shire of Bridgetown-Greenbushes

 

  So  some of the people in Bridgetown (councillors, council employees, and presumably their families) are allowed to have this information about  employment conditions at the Shire and others (ratepayers) are not.

I must go to the time, trouble and expense of an FOI request to see this innocuous document.

I will be entitled to the document under FOI, and unless Mr Clynch is completely ignorant about the FOI Act, he knows that. 

The only material exempt under the Act is that which reveals personal information, might harm the State's economic interests, is commercially confidential, is protected by legal privilege, may interfere with law enforcement or jeopardise national security.

The CEO is simply playing a game.  The object of the game is to discourage people from scrutinising Council activities.

Truth slowly surfacing in pool saga

Each time the Shire Council makes a fresh announcement about the fabulous progress they are making on a new public swimming pool, more little gems emerge which help to reveal the true depth of the fiasco.

This week, they have been trumpeting completion of the plans for the project.

So we now have a plan, almost a year after the old pool was dug up.  The local paper says: "Safeway Building Renovations, the company building the pool, submitted the plans to the council on February 24..."  Hold on, didn't Council sign a deal with this company agreeing to pay it $4 million to build the pool a couple of months ago?  How did Council know what it would get for the $4 million if the plans were not finalised at that time?  Nice work if you can get it!

The picture becomes clearer later in the article when President Pratico says a community fundraising committee has been set up "to help cover costs".   What costs??   "...some fitouts for the pool," Pratico states.

So for $4 million of ratepayer and taxpayer funds we get a partially completed pool facility, and  ratepayers and residents will have to cough up the money to finish the job.

 What a joke!

Drowning in spin

There are many gullible people in Bridgetown, so you really can't blame the Shire for thinking it can simply cover up its blunders with a sprinkle of bulldust here and there.

However,  a growing number of people are looking at the desolate hole in the ground where the swimming pool used to be and wondering why it was removed nearly a year ago when there is still no progress on the new one.

Somebody asked this question on a local facebook page and Cr Peter Quinby quickly jumped in to retort; "have you ever tried to build a pool in winter?"  It seems he doesn't understand the issue. Construction was supposed to commence at the end of last winter. If this new pool cannot be built over the coming winter, it will have to be built next spring and summer, meaning the community will be without a pool in summer for two years running.

I'm simply seeking some honesty and accountability from councillors and staff.

If the tender process was botched, say so and take appropriate action against those responsible.

Instead, we get more spin and obfuscation in the Council's "Insight" magazine, in an article which revealed the design of the new pool has still not been finalised.


"The decision to excavate the site at the conclusion of the 2013-14 swimming season has proven to be of benefit, allowing the summer and autumn of 2015 to be clear for the construction of the new facility," Insight says. 

Huh? Summer is almost over and there has been no construction work whatsoever.

It is interesting that the Insight article did not repeat earlier promises that the new pool would be ready for next summer.

Bridgetown families just want a place to swim on a hot day

This hole in the ground is what remains of the much-loved 50m pool which served us very well up to last summer.  It was demolished last year because, they said, work had to begin on the new 25m pool to replace it.

Well, here we are sweltering through the final month of a very hot, dry summer and there doesn't seem to be much work done on this new pool.

If, as the Council assures us, the new pool can still be built in time for next summer, why the hell didn't they leave the old one in place (at least for the school holidays) until someone was ready to start work on the new one??

This vacant site is an affront to families who are crying out for somewhere to cool off on a hot day. Its a slap in the face for those who must drive two or three times a week to Manjimup to take their kids to swimming training.

It is also a monument to the mismanagement which has become the hallmark of our Shire Council.

For some inexplicable reason, those in control seem to hate old Bridgetown and can't wait to renovate or replace every aspect of the town until it looks like a suburb of Perth.