HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Subject Index
Legislative Council - Fifty-Third Parliament, Second Session (53-2)
2015-10-27 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

Bills

Local Government (Accountability and Governance) Amendment Bill

Second Reading

Adjourned debate on second reading.

(Continued from 13 October 2015.)

The Hon. J.A. DARLEY (15:30): I rise briefly to indicate my support for this bill and to foreshadow that I will be moving a series of amendments aimed at further strengthening those measures aimed at providing greater transparency and accountability. In a nutshell, those amendments include ensuring that expenditure by CEOs and senior executive officers of council is accounted for by requiring credit card statements and primary returns to be published online for inspection by members of the public.

The amendments will also require the register of salaries to be made available online. Currently, councils are only required to ensure that the register is available for inspection during business hours at council premises. If a person requires an extract for information contained in that register, then they can be charged by the councils. The amendments would overcome the need to attend council offices to inspect the information and to pay any associated fees for obtaining copies of the information.

I know from experience that on at least one occasion I have requested this information from a council, and I have been quoted somewhere in the order of $2,000 or $3,000 in order to have it copied and provided to me. That is an absurd amount of money, particularly when you consider that other councils of roughly the same size have been willing to offer the equivalent information free of charge. These amendments would certainly overcome that by enabling someone to print off the information required without being charged an exorbitant fee by council.

The bill also seeks to reform the conflict of interest provisions of the Local Government Act. This is considered an extremely important element of the bill and one that has been the subject of considerable consultation, especially in terms of perceived conflicts versus actual conflicts. I am advised that the changes regarding these provisions have been recommended by the Ombudsman and supported by the Independent Commissioner Against Corruption and the Local Government Association. In addition, it also seeks to strengthen confidentiality provisions in line with concerns raised by the Ombudsman.

Overall, this bill appears to have the support of most, if not all, members, including me. I understand some members have sought their own advice about the amendments I intend to move. I certainly hope those amendments can be supported. That said, if they are not supported on this occasion, then I certainly hope the government will consider consulting on them further.

The Hon. K.J. MAHER (Minister for Manufacturing and Innovation, Minister for Automotive Transformation, Minister for Aboriginal Affairs and Reconciliation) (15:33): I thank members who have made a contribution to the debate on this bill. This bill aims to strengthen accountability and governance in local government through a package of improvements that have been proposed over the past few years, in addition to some aspects which have been developed through consultation with the current Minister for Local Government (the member for Frome) in another place.

The clarification of provisions of the Local Government Act 1999 relating to conflicts of interest is of significant importance to elected members and ultimately to public confidence in local government decision-making processes. The ICAC Commissioner, the Ombudsman and the LGA have been key drivers behind giving advice on most of the proposed amendments in this bill. I think it is important to stress that there has been thorough and widespread consultation about the provisions of this bill and an eagerness for the bill's timely passage through parliament and the implementation of improvements to local government processes.

Members have raised issues and put forward views about the local government at large, but I think that some of the suggestions for change are beyond those contained in the bill and will require more extensive consultation across the local government sector and the community broadly. It is my intention to address some of those specific matters, and matters that were raised by the Hon. John Darley in his speech earlier, as they arise during the committee stage of this bill. I will, however, comment briefly on the requirement in this bill for parts of the elected member register to be published on a website.

The objective of this measure is to improve transparency and accountability by allowing members of the public to access information in a way that meets contemporary community expectations. The information required to be disclosed by elected members is already required under the current act. This bill simply provides what many would consider a more convenient and accessible method for obtaining the information.

In bringing the second reading debate to a close, on behalf the Hon. Geoff Brock, the local government minister, I acknowledge the assistance and cooperation of the Local Government Association, the ICAC Commissioner, the Ombudsman, parliamentary counsel and the staff of the Office of Local Government. Without their support and preparedness to negotiate, these legislative improvements would have been very difficult indeed.

Bill read a second time.

Committee Stage

Clause 1.

The Hon. D.W. RIDGWAY: During the second reading debate on this bill, I made some comments in relation to information provided to me by the shadow minister, Steven Griffiths (the member for Goyder) about the notes that had been provided to me by my office. I was a little confused and indicated that we had not heard from the LGA at that time. In fact, Steven had met with the LGA and had provided to me a briefing that had been provided by the LGA. I wanted to correct the record. I did say that we had not from the LGA and that I had not heard from the member for Goyder but, in fact, he had been doing his work. He had met with the LGA and was provided with a briefing on the Hon. John Darley's amendments.

Clause passed.

Clauses 2 to 20 passed.

New clauses 20A and 20B.

The Hon. J.A. DARLEY: I move:

Amendment No 1 [Darley–1]—

New clauses, page 13, after line 22—Insert:

20A—Amendment of section 105—Register of remuneration, salaries and benefits

(1) Section 105(3)—after 'to inspect' insert:

(without charge)

(2) Section 105(4)—delete subsection (4) and substitute:

(4) The chief executive officer must also cause the Register of Salaries to be made available on a website determined by the chief executive officer for inspection (without charge) by members of the public.

20B—Insertion of section 105A

After section 105 insert:

105A—Publication of certain expenditure

(1) A council must publish, within 14 days of the end of each month, on a website determined by the chief executive officer, the following details in relation to each credit card provided by the council for use by a designated officer:

(a) the name of the designated officer entitled to use the credit card;

(b) a statement of expenses for the month incurred using the credit card.

(2) Any details published under subsection (1) must remain available on the website for inspection (without charge) by members of the public for a period of 5 years from the date of publication.

(3) In this section—

designated officer means the chief executive officer or a senior executive officer of a council.

This amendment does two things. Firstly, it requires the register of salaries, established under section 105 of the Local Government Act, to be made available online. Secondly, the amendment requires that councils provide details of charges to corporate credit cards by chief executive officers and senior executive officers of council. Both amendments are aimed at strengthening transparency and accountability measures.

Currently, councils are required to make available for inspection at council premises a register of salaries. Where a person attends council and requests a copy of the register (or part thereof) councils are able to charge for the provision of that information.

Certainly, in terms of trying to draw comparisons between councils, it can become a very expensive exercise. As I mentioned during my second reading contribution, my officers previously requested the information from the council which, from memory, has indicated that it would require payment of $6 per entry, for a grand total of something in the order of $3,000, in order to provide that information in hard copy.

If the information was provided on the web, obviously it would alleviate the need for payment altogether. I can understand charging a nominal fee for a service, but this is an absurd amount of money to be charging for the provision of such information. I think you would be hard-pressed to even find a law firm that is able to charge such astronomical fees for what really is photocopying or printing off information that is already available to council. It is certainly more than what is prescribed in the Supreme Court scale of costs for an equivalent service.

Broadening the scope of publication of expenditure to include chief executive officers and senior executive officers is also a very sensible move aimed at providing more transparency. There is no question that having this sort of information is beneficial to the public and also to ensuring accountability.

I think it is fair to say that we have probably now reached the point where many members of the public also feel it is their right to know where and what their funds are being spent on, whether that be taxpayer dollars or council rates. There is absolutely no reason why, in this instance, the disclosure of such information should be limited to elected council members. This is a sensible amendment and I would ask all honourable members to support it.

The Hon. K.J. MAHER: I thank the honourable member for his contribution and appreciate the genuine earnestness in the way in which he has gone about moving the amendment and what he seeks to do. However, the government will not be supporting these particular amendments at this time as they propose significant changes to the Local Government Act that have not yet been consulted on properly with the local government sector or more widely.

The Hon. D.W. RIDGWAY: We gave an indication in our second reading contribution that we needed to take the Hon. John Darley's amendments through our party room process, which we have done, and we think these amendments would be best included in the wide ranging review of the act, proposed by the minister, in 2016. It has been flagged and I suspect that will happen.

At this point in time, we indicate that we will not be supporting the Hon. John Darley's amendments, but we do indicate that we would be very interested in looking at, and urging the minister and the government to have a look at, some improved standards of accountability and transparency. These people are being paid with ratepayers' money and expending ratepayers' rates and so I think the community has a right to have some greater degree of transparency and accountability, which is something that has been missing to a fair degree with this state government over the last 14 years. The opposition party is a strong supporter of increased transparency and accountability in all levels of government, but we will not be supporting the Hon. John Darley's amendments today, and look forward to the government including it in their review of the Local Government Act maybe later next year.

The Hon. D.G.E. HOOD: We can see where the numbers lie here so there is no point in a protracted debate. I would just like to put on the record that Family First will support the amendments.

New clauses negatived.

Clause 21 carried.

New clauses 21A and 21B.

The Hon. J.A. DARLEY: I move:

Amendment No 2 [Darley–1]—

New clauses, page 13, after line 32—Insert:

21A—Amendment of section 115—Form and content of returns

Section 115(2)—delete subsection (2) and substitute:

(2) A person who has submitted a return under this Division must notify—

(a) in the case of the chief executive officer—the principal member of the council; or

(b) in the case of a prescribed officer—the chief executive officer,

of a change or variation in the information appearing on the Register in respect of the person or a member of his or her family within 1 month of the change or variation.

Maximum penalty: $10,000.

(3) It is a defence to a prosecution for an offence against subsection (2) to prove that the person did not know, and could not reasonably be expected to have known, of the relevant change or variation.

21B—Substitution of sections 118 and 119

Sections 118 and 119—delete the sections and substitute:

118—Inspection of Register

(1) A council must publish, in accordance with the regulations, the following details in relation to each person to whom this Division applies contained in the Register on a website determined by the chief executive officer (and cause the details on the website to be updated at regular intervals):

(a) the person's income sources or employer;

(b) the name of any political party, any body or association formed for political purposes or any trade or professional organisation of which the person is a member;

(c) any gifts received by the person that are required to be included in the information entered in the Register in relation to the person.

(2) A person is entitled to inspect (without charge) the Register at the principal office of the council during ordinary office hours.

(3) A person is entitled, on payment of a fee fixed by the council, to a copy of the Register.

(4) A word or expression used in this section that is defined in Schedule 3 clause 1(1) has the same meaning in this section as in that subclause (and as if any reference in that subclause to a member were a reference to an officer to whom this Division applies).

119—Restrictions on publication

(1) A person must not—

(a) publish information derived from a Register unless the information constitutes a fair and accurate summary of the information contained in the Register and is published in the public interest; or

(b) comment on the facts set forth in a Register unless the comment is fair and published in the public interest and without malice.

(2) If information or comment is published by a person in contravention of subsection (1), the person, and any person who authorised the publication of the information or comment, is guilty of an offence.

Maximum penalty: $10,000.

The amendments are in the same form as those provisions of the bill that apply to council members, namely clauses 11, 12 and 13. The intention is to bring chief executive officers and senior executives into line with elected council members and to treat them in the same way when it comes to requirements regarding the disclosure of interests.

Like the previous amendment, it is aimed at ensuring a higher level of transparency and accountability. As we know, chief executive officers of councils are paid anything up to $350,000-odd for the role they undertake. It is only reasonable that ratepayers have access to appropriate information regarding their remuneration, other packages they may receive and their affiliations with any political parties or professional organisations in appropriate circumstances. Basically, this amendment aims to ensure that, for the purposes of such disclosure, they are treated the same as council members. I ask all honourable members to support the amendment.

The Hon. K.J. MAHER: Again, I thank the honourable member for bringing these amendments to us today, but as with the last amendment they are not supported by the government as they propose significant changes that have not yet been consulted on widely with the local government sector.

The Hon. D.W. RIDGWAY: As I indicated before, we are attracted to looking at these issues in the broader, wider-ranging review of the Local Government Act, hopefully next year, but we will not be supporting the amendments today.

The Hon. D.G.E. HOOD: Again, I indicate Family First support for the amendment.

The Hon. T.A. FRANKS: I indicate that the Greens also support this amendment.

New clauses negatived.

Remaining clauses (22 to 40), schedule and title passed.

Bill reported without amendment.

Third Reading

The Hon. K.J. MAHER (Minister for Manufacturing and Innovation, Minister for Automotive Transformation, Minister for Aboriginal Affairs and Reconciliation) (15:46):

That this bill be now read a third time.

Bill read a third time and passed.

PARLIAMENTARY BUSINESS
MEMBERS
GET INVOLVED
ABOUT PARLIAMENT
VISIT
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL
HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY
CONTACT