As the former Mayor, Deputy Mayor and a councillor of the Huon Valley Council, I am extremely concerned over the astonishing statement made by the CEO and the Mayor of the Huon Valley Council at their recent 24 April 2024 Ordinary Meeting of Council.
In response to a public question from the gallery where Huon Valley ratepayer Caleb Elcock asked:
“… does the council view that Tasmanian Times is a legitimate news outlet that a regular human being like myself can rely on and trust?”
Mayor Doyle
“Thank you, Caleb. Umm I think we have made it known that we do not umm take the Tasmanian Times as umm, what do you call it … what do you call it? Legit … legitimate, I suppose.”
CEO Kranz
“Yeah, they’re not recognised as a legitimate media source.”
In response to a public question without notice at their 27 March 2024 meeting, council’s response was “Council does not recognise the Tasmanian Times as a legitimate media outlet.”
This very concerning policy position of the Huon Valley Council has now been made public and deserves a full and complete explanation by them.
Tasmanian Times is a legitimate news outlet in Tasmania and has for some twenty years been providing commentary on many matters of importance to the communities across Tasmania, particularly the affairs of local government.
The question must now be asked: in adopting this policy position has the HVC denied Caleb Elcock and other members of the Huon Valley community their democratic right to express their views to a publicly recognised media outlet by not formally recognising that organisation as public media organisation?
The HVC has every right to disagree with the content produced by Tasmanian Times, and as with any media outlet council can express its own views. However the Huon Valley community should know why this policy position has been established by the Huon Valley Council on their behalf and its much wider implications if adopted across all media outlets.
Tasmanian Times has frequently been publishing media releases from Tasmanian councils, including the Huon Valley Council. It appears the Huon Valley Council has removed this benefit that they have enjoyed in the past.
The question is why?
Dysfunctional councils will always attract negative public comments and the Huon Valley Council has a history of controversy, conflict, and dysfunction.
Again, the question is why?
The lack of legislative reform and restructure of Local Government in Tasmania is contributing significantly to the dysfunction of councils as demonstrated by the small Huon Valley Council.
In my opinion the Huon Valley Council has now possibly breached the Local Government Act 1993 and Federal Competition and Consumer Act 2010.
The council’s policy position of undermining Tasmanian Times legitimate role as a media source in Australia establishes a very dangerous precedent. Laws have been made to protect companies and business from these types of actions taken by the Huon Valley Council.
In Tasmania we do not have an Anti-Corruption Commission. The Tasmanian Integrity Commission lacks legislation support to make it of any significant value. This position is well supported by independent national reports that concur: Tasmania has the weakest integrity laws of any state or territory.
It is highly unlikely the state government will take any action against the Huon Valley Council. This hands-off approach is a real concern.
Now we have a situation of possible breaches of the Local Government Act by a council in publicly announcing a policy position condemning the Tasmanian Times to be not recognised as a legitimate media source.
Section 65 of the Local Government Act 1993 requires the General Manager, to provide qualified advice.
Who provided this advice to HV Council? What are the qualifications of the person or persons who provided the advice, and what formed the justification for the basis of that advice?
Section 65 of the Local Government Act 1993 also requires that a council is not to make any decisions unless the GM provides such qualified advice.
In adopting this policy position against Tasmanian Times, were other local government councils consulted? If not, why not, and if yes, what were their responses?
Was the Director of Local Government aware that HV Council adopted such a policy position, that could impact on other media outlets and their relationships with councils and the state government?
Most importantly, if there has been no formal resolution, that council does not recognise Tasmanian Times as a legitimate media outlet, then the comments by both the Mayor and the GM on the 24 April 2024 Council meeting, may possibly be in breach of the Local Government Act 1993.
As the former Mayor I am now calling on the Minister for Local Government to stand up for local democracy and acknowledge the legal rights of legitimate media organisations to function, even if they if they do not always provide positive commentary on their activities.
The ad hoc commentary by the Mayor and the GM in announcing the policy position of HV Council not to legitimately recognise Tasmanian Times as a recognised media organisation without the possibility of having a formal resolution of Council, in my view, constitutes dysfunction within the Huon Valley Council to follow due process as required by the Local Government Act 1993.
In the event that councillors will now be requested to support a new motion to confirm the public statements of both the GM and Mayor, the state government may well say it is now all legal in meeting the requirements of the Local Government Act 1993, and no action will be taken.
The question will then be: is any new motion in possible breach of Federal Consumer Law? It is highly unlikely the Director of Local Government will ask Crown Law to investigate this issue.
The Local Government Act 1993 gives significant powers to General Managers and their staff. When the council is not performing to community expectations, the community elect new, and in many cases, inexperienced councillors, based solely on their popularity.
However, the community concerns and issues do not necessarily go away as the senior council staff and management remain the same.
In some cases, expanded delegations are requested by General Managers, given the inexperience of councillors.
The result is no change in the practices of local councils and in some cases, it becomes even worse.
The increased delegations and lack of council oversite can be a serious governance problem in local government.
Councillors can be informed that council has a policy position on a particular matter when in fact it is not the case. When they are caught out, as possibly in this case, the new and existing councillors are pressured to support management in passing resolutions to support individual councillors, staff and the previously publicly stated positions of the Mayor and the GM.
Moreover, the Huon Valley Council’s policy position and its relationship with the Tasmanian Times is of real concern for the democratic process of local government in Tasmania.
If the state government policy was to not recognise the ABC for example as a legitimate media source, then it effectively removes any questioning of the processes of government. This would be Russian style autocracy.
The Huon Valley Council is an agency of government and state government support of this policy position of the HVC should be of real concern to the all our media organisations and the wider community. Once again it appears to be poor decision making and policy making on the run by the Huon Valley Council.
The serious question is:
Does the council have the right to deny freedom of expression of individuals and media outlets like the Tasmanian Times?
The Huon Valley Council is inconsequential in the big picture if they toe the political line of the government of the day. Making policy announcements that have not possibly been previously endorsed by council and then asking existing councillors to toe the stated position only continues the dysfunction of the Huon Valley Council.
The Huon Valley Council decision in relation to the Tasmania Times is a clear demonstration of the continued dysfunction of the council in my view.
Section 65 Local Government Act 1993
(1) The general manager must ensure that any advice, information, or recommendation given to the council or a council committee is given by a person who has the qualifications or experience necessary to give such advice, information, or recommendation.
(2) A council or council committee is not to decide on any matter which requires the advice of a qualified person without considering such advice unless –
(a) the general manager certifies, in writing –
(I) that such advice was obtained; and
(ii) that the general manager took the advice into account in providing general advice to the council or council committee; and
(b) a copy of that advice or, if the advice was given orally, a written transcript or summary of that advice is provided to the council or council committee with the general manager’s certificate.
Peter Coad was a former councillor of the Port Cygnet municipality, councillor, Mayor and Deputy Mayor of the Huon Valley Council and previous to that had some 15 years in local government, and was employed as Executive Director of the Building and Construction Industry Training Board for some 29 years. Coad had extensive involvement at a national level in the Cooperative Research Centres program, a development for the construction industry and he established the first Building and Construction Industry Training Fund in Australia. Coad has assisted other state boards with specific experience in strategic planning and policy development, implementation and review.
