Coast call for council probe

Alex de Vos
Surf Coast councillors have called on the State Ombudsman’s office to investigate whether their shire is riddled with conflicts of interest.
In a letter leaked to the Independent, signatory councillors Roly Livingstone, Lindsay Schroeter, Ron Humphrey and Jim Tutt asked the Ombudsman to investigate various issues for potential conflicts of interest.
The letter asked whether Mayor Dean Webster’s shire contract for grass slashing conflicted with his role as a councillor.
“The Local Government Act states a person is not capable of becoming or continuing to be a councillor if he or she is a member of council staff,” the letter said.
“Although Dean is not a Surf Coast Shire employee, he does however have a contract with the shire that performs duties that are carried out by council employees.
“As mayor Dean is privy to information that no other contractor is privy to. Dean should not be a Surf Coast Shire councillor let alone a mayor.”
Cr Webster denied he had a conflict of interest.
“I have never been a member of council staff and, as per past advice, there is no conflict of interest for me,” he said.
“In fact, since being involved with council my work has decreased more than 50 per cent.”
The letter also asked the Ombudsman to investigate:
• councillors making decisions in closed-door briefing sessions without voting at council meetings;
• other councillors serving on bodies whose decisions affected council, such as Victorian Coastal Council and Victorian Local Governance Association;
• planning committee members acting as consultants to the Surf Coast Shire on planning issues;
• council approving Great Ocean Road Coast Committee plans such as a Fisherman’s Beach re-development despite serving as a committee member of GORCC.
Cr Humphrey said the letter was not an attack on individual councillors.
“I’m sure they believe they’re doing the right thing,” he said.
“However, I believe there are conflicts of interest facing council. The questions we’ve asked the Ombudsman are questions that would be common to many councils.”
The Ombudsman’s office refused to say whether it would investigate the shire.
A shire spokesperson had not responded to the Independent’s call for comment before the paper went to press yesterday.