Report:council open to corruption claims

Andrew Mathieson
THE STATE Ombudsman yesterday told City Hall to clean up planning processes that were open to “allegations of corruption”.
George Brouwer’s report to parliament followed complaints from Geelong ratepayers and planning applicants.
Planning-decision structures at City Hall lacked transparency and created conflicts of interest, the report said.
“I consider it important that the (City) have a code of conduct in place that outlines the parameters of councillors’ direct contact with staff to avoid any allegations of undue influence being brought,” Mr Brouwer.
The Ombudsman concluded that councillors had sought preferential treatment from City Hall officers.
Councillors “shopped around” for right answers from planning officers, staff told the ombudsman’s inquiry.
Mr Brouwer found that some councillors set agendas according to “specific issues in their constituents’ interests”.
“I was advised that this involves seeking planning advice from one planner but if the advice is contrary to the answer they seek (then) the councillor will seek the desired outcome from other planners,” Mr Brouwer said.
The report found councillors were open to “allegations of corruption”.
Mr Brouwer said he had referred one of the conflict-of-interest allegations, against a councillor, to “another agency” for further investigation.
He recommended sweeping reform of the decision-making forums in which the city determine planning applications.
Mr Brouwer called for greater transparency for councillor hearing panels to “promote procedural fairness”.
The panel also lacked a sufficient mechanism for reporting back to other councillors.
“I consider this to be an unsatisfactory practice when decisions that are binding on council are made with such a small representation of councillors,” Mr Brouwer said.
The ombudsman recommended that City Hall develop a planners procedure manual and review the delegation of planning approvals, councillor hearing panel and councillors’ code of conduct.