A decision to limit councillors to two notices of motions at council meetings has led to accusations of "stifling free speech".
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
In the mayoral minute at the July 22 ordinary meeting of Wingecarribee Shire Council, Mayor Duncan Gair introduced an amendment to the Code of Meeting Practice to limit notice of motions and questions with notice.
The amendment stipulated that each councillor would be limited to a maximum of two notices of motion or questions with notice per meeting.
It also stipulated that questions with notice would be limited to one question only and excluded questions with multiple parts to it.
Councillor Peter Nelson said that it could be argued that the amendment was "stopping good governance."
"I've always been a supporter of questions with notice in the business paper," he said.
"But I find myself spending most of my time preparing to argue against the councillors that are putting the questions with notice up and to me that's not good governance.
"I believe I should be spending my time on the meat and bones of the council issues that are before us."
Cr Nelson said he would support Cr Gair's motion.
Councillor Garry Turland said he opposed the amendment.
"You might say that were stifling free speech here," he said.
"On multiple occasions, I have written emails to the management with no response from the general manager and other parties within the council administration.
"If I can't get an answer from staff in the proper manner, I will put a question with notice and a notice of motion.
"You are stifling free speech."
Councillor Ken Halstead also spoke against the amendment.
"It minimises the opportunity for democratically elected councils to bring forth important matters, and will result in being restricted by a modified Code of Meeting Practice albeit allegedly allowable," he said.
"Quite frankly it's a concerted effort to muzzle councillors.
"You've already got a Code of Meeting Practice and it has been drafted with having close regard to what was the model code put out by the Office of Local Government.
"It does worry me quite frankly if you have already consulted with the OLG, it seems that they will be seen as a facilitator of the proposed policy change.
"The wider public should be made aware that the current council via the bureaucracy or yourself, will change existing policy on the run to facilitate the erosion of the democratic process.
"I don't think you need to move or adopt this."
Councillor Larry Whipper said he would ordinarily agree that "councillors have the right to put in numerous notice of motions and questions with notices."
"However of late there really has been overdone," he said.
"I think there needs to be some discipline shown by some of the councillors because it is dragging on and we aren't completing our business.
"We have limits under the Code of Meeting Practice and we do in fairness to the community need to fit in those time frames as well."
"I've been on council for quite a while and it is very rare that any councillor would have more than two notices of motion or questions with notice.
"In this instance, I don't see it as gagging, I see it as efficiency and getting through council meetings."
Councillor Ian Scandrett said he completely opposed the changes.
"This is a gag on free speech. We are elected councillors and we are responsible for the electorate," he said.
"Sometimes you need to bring things to the council for various reasons so the public can see that you are raising a matter, or because you can't get an answer on it."
Councillor Graham McLaughlin flagged his support for the amendment.
"There have been quite a few occasions where we have not gotten through the business paper," he said.
"What I find the best thing to do if you need a quick response is to actually get on the phone, call up one of the managers and ask them a question.
"If every councillor put in two notices of motion per meeting we would be battling to get through them.
"It's not as if we are stifling debate or that the community doesn't have a voice."
Cr Gair said the number of questions with notice and notice of motions had been extraordinary.
"I think up until March there was something like 35 notices of motion and questions with notice," he said.
"There is a time frame that senior staff are spending on these notices which have to been written because that is the nature of them.
"Pick up the phone... You've got the general manager, deputy general managers, and managers who can give you an answer and if you are not happy with it that way, it may have to come back as an extra step."
The amendment to limit notices of motion and questions with notice was voted for by Councillors, Nelson, Whipper, McLaughlin, Gair and Grahame Andrews.
Councillors Turland, Halstead and Scandrett voted against it.
The motion was carried.
Council staff will devise a draft Code of Meeting Practice document and will present it to council at the August 12 meeting for consideration.
Love local news? Sign up to our weekly newsletter
Vera Demertzis
Journalist at the Southern Highland News covering council yarns and community news. Got a tip or a story to tell? Email vera.demertzis@southernhighlandnews.com.au or call on 0427 250 908.
Journalist at the Southern Highland News covering council yarns and community news. Got a tip or a story to tell? Email vera.demertzis@southernhighlandnews.com.au or call on 0427 250 908.
