Local Government Censorship

The Hon. F. PANGALLO (14:42): I seek leave to make a brief explanation before asking the Minister for Primary Industries, representing the Minister for Local Government in the other place, a question on the matter of local government censorship.

Leave granted.

The Hon. F. PANGALLO: A disturbing trend is emerging among certain councils where the administration, through mayors, seek to silence criticism and/or innocuous posts on social media by councillors with legal threats, under the guise of causing mental health harm to staff. In December 2024, the Whyalla council adopted a very heavy-handed and undemocratic approach to muzzle one of its councillors and deputy mayor, Tamy Pond. A compassionate Ms Pond, conscious of the turbulence at the Whyalla Steelworks, job losses and the impact it was having on businesses and general confidence, simply reached out to her community, offering support in a heartfelt Facebook post. It is what any elected person is obliged to do. I seek leave to table that post by Tamy Pond, the deputy mayor.

Leave granted.

The Hon. F. PANGALLO: Ms Pond's post was met with a threatening email by Whyalla mayor, Phill Stone, muzzling her and those who had made comments on her page. The glass-jawed mayor did not like any negativity, accusing Ms Pond, saying that her views may be misinterpreted and could contradict those of the mayor and the council. To any reasonable person, they do not. His council works for the people of Whyalla who have a right to know, and I seek leave to table that email.

Leave granted.

The Hon. F. PANGALLO: With the threat of legal action for defamation, even though a public body cannot sue, Ms Pond was forced to take down the post. Similar notices have been sent to other critics. This is tantamount to censorship, the erosion of free speech and the democratic process. What followed next is just as alarming. Requests under freedom of information for the correspondence was denied, and then the rejection was reviewed by the Deputy Ombudsman. However, in an extraordinary determination, the Deputy Ombudsman, Megan Carter, found it was not in the public interest to release it. It now raises the serious question of the Deputy Ombudsman's judgement about what constitutes public interest disclosure. My questions to the minister are:

1. Is he concerned that ratepayers' money is being spent to shut down the democratic rights of ratepayers and elected representatives to have an opinion?

2. Is the minister concerned that the Deputy Ombudsman's determination undermines the integrity agency's role in being a guardian of transparency in government?

The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN (Minister for Primary Industries and Regional Development, Minister for Forest Industries) (14:46): I will refer the question to the minister in the other place and bring back a response.