0
0
The NSW Government has refused to allow the earlier debate of a petition signed by more than 20,000 Central Coast residents demanding a public inquiry into the Central Coast Council’s financial affairs.
By Jackie Pearson
Shadow Minister for the Central Coast and state Member for Wyong, Mr David Harris MP, said the NSW Government had rejected a request to debate the petition earlier than the scheduled date in May.
“The Coast’s Labor MPs wrote to the Government asking that the petition signed by more than 20,000 people be brought forward,” Mr Harris said.
“We invited Member for Terrigal to sign the letter as he had publicly stated he supported an Inquiry, unfortunately he declined,” he said.
The petition calls for a Judicial Inquiry into Central Coast Council.
The Minister is due to make a decision on an Inquiry in April but the petition is due to be debated in May which is after the decision.
“Surely the views of more than 20,000 residents should be heard,” Mr Harris said. “But NO the Government rejected our request.”
Mr Harris published a letter on social media from NSW Attorney General, Mr Mark Speakman, which said, “The government will not agree to the suspension of Standing and Sessional orders to accommodate your request at the expense of time already allocated for government business..”
Speakman’s letter listed government bills that are currently working their way through parliament, including matters related to COVID-19, child abuse and the Local Government Act.
Clearly the financial affairs of the Central Coast Council do not rate as highly for the NSW Government as its own policy agenda but an earlier debate about whether or not there should be an inquiry into the Central Coast’s finances isn’t in the best interests of the Berejiklian Government.
The Member for Terrigal, Mr Adam Crouch, who is also Government Whip and Parliamentary Secretary for the Central Coast, has taken out newspaper ads expressing his opposition to the proposed 15 per cent rate increase and stated support for a public inquiry.
In his role as Whip, Mr Crouch does hold a significant amount of sway over what his party does in the Legislative Assembly, but, on this occasion, it appears his influence has not been significant enough for the debate to be brought forward.
What does this mean for the Central Coast?
It means that the NSW Government’s whole approach to the affairs of Central Coast Council has been politically driven and we are not likely to get a full public inquiry, let alone a commission of inquiry, into what really went wrong between 2016 and 2020.
It means Mr Crouch’s decision to take out full-page advertisements in local newspapers and take to social media to “stand with” his community, oppose the rate increase and call for an inquiry, was pure politics.
Mr Crouch read the mood of the people and decided he needed to appear to stand united with them in opposing a potential rate rise and calling for an inquiry. Unfortunately he has talked the talk but that’s about all he’s done. So where does that leave our community, our economy and our future? What happens next? A few scenarios spring to mine.
The contract of Interim Adminstrator, Mr Dick Persson, concludes on 29 April. At that time the Minister for Local Government, Ms Shelly Hancock, will need to decide what happens next. One option will be to return the Councillors and let them cook slowly at the stake until the September local government election.
Two Liberal Councillors have resigned so and one Labor Councillor may not return. if reinstated, the Councillors left around the table would be five or six Labor, two Liberal, and five independents. Two-to-three of those independents usually vote with the Liberal Councillors and one proudly behaves like a human wrecking ball.
The current Mayor is not strong in the Chair. It would be in the best interests of the NSW Government to put the Councillors back in place, let the human wrecking ball do his thing and continue with the narrative that it was the dysfunction of the elected Councillors that has caused all the problems since amalgamation.
I’m putting my money on that scenario but, if that is what the NSW Government does, it will be a cynical and disgraceful strategy.
The only way our community will be able to fully understand how one of the biggest local government in the country was brought to its financial knees will be through a public commission of inquiry with powers similar to those of a Royal Commission. If Mr Crouch truly cared about his constituents he would be fighting for this and he is not.
Another option before the Minister for Local Government is to sack the Councillors but, to do so, Ms Hancock would be forced to have a public inquiry.
Any public inquiry would shine the light on the true costs of amalgamation. It would give elected Councillors the opportunity to air in public some of the disgraceful, unethical and unprofessional behaviour they have been subject to by former and current employees.
It would bring into the glaring light of day the abject failure of this NSW Government’s amalgamation experiment.
The Administrator’s reports and the forensic report tabled at the March 9 Council meeting don’t give the community any where near the answers we deserve about how the finances of our Council were run down to such a point that we now face $500 million in debt and the prospect of a decade of cut services, infrastructure backlogs and increasing rates.
What can we do?
We can refuse to settle for the hand we’ve been dealt. We can write letters to Mr Crouch, Ms Berejiklian and Ms Hancock demanding that a public inquiry goes ahead. We can register to speak at the public council forums. We can discuss what’s really going on with friends and family. We can make submissions on yourvoiceourcoast about the matters that are important to us. We can vote NO in the September referendum to reduce the number of elected Councillors from 15 to 9.
We can refuse to be treated like mushrooms and keep insisting on truth and justice.
