Council’s hands tied

By Bridget Brady
CASEY councillors have criticised Local Government conflict of interest rules, saying they restrict civic leaders from doing what they were elected to do.
Mayfield Ward councillor Kevin Bradford said changes to the Act, which were made in December 2008 and are currently under review, had “gone beyond what is reasonable”.
Cr Bradford said it was of increasing frustration to him that he could not speak on arguably one of the biggest debacles to ever come out of Cranbourne – the methane gas leaks at the Brookland Greens estate – because his family lived there.
In an attempt to stamp out some of the problems in Local Government, the laws had gone beyond what was rational, Cr Bradford said.
“Hopefully we will have some more common sense in the future.”
Under the Act, a conflict of interest exists when a person has a direct or indirect interest including a close association, an indirect financial interest, a conflicting duty, an applicable gift or is a party to the matter.
Some examples might include a relative or member of a household having a direct interest, being an employee, or being a manager or member of the governing body of an organisation.
River Gum Ward councillor Wayne Smith, who is an active advocate for the arts in Casey, said the rules meant arts groups would suffer as result if he was a member of their committees.
Cr Smith said it would hinder his ability to be their voice in the council chambers.
“It is crazy,” Cr Smith said.
Edrington Ward councillor Simon Curtis said the changes had “gone a bridge too far”.
He said the reason for Local Government was for councillors to be close to the people in their community, but it meant civic leaders often had a conflict of interest with the current legislation.
Victorian Local Governance Association (VLGA) president Rose Iser said Casey councillors were not alone in their frustrations.
“There is wide consensus that the current laws create some problems with councillors meaning they can’t represent their community in ways that the community expect them to,” Ms Iser said.
The previous legislation was much vaguer, and now it attempted to set out the exact scenarios where there was or wasn’t a conflict of interest, Ms Iser said.
“But it’s not as clear as that. We are hoping for some change in the next few months.”
Despite the criticism of the legislation, Ms Iser said no-one suggested councillors should vote on things where a clear conflict of interest existed.