I wish to respond to the [Local Government Governance Panel (LGGP)] investigator, Ms Stevens’ finding in which she stated that she “is aware that Cr Chirgwin has not signed the current Code of Conduct and so may not accept its value in determining the way a Councillor behaves in their role as an elected member of the community”, being one of the reasons for breach of the Code (Page 8 of LGA-GP Report).

The truth as to why Cr Chirgwin (including Crs Walkom and Liu) has not signed the current Code (not “refused” as alleged by Ms Stevens) was that there were a number of critical issues which concerned us which needed to be addressed before the Code is adopted.  Cr Chirgwin did not refuse the signing of the Code, except deferring the endorsement of this policy until all concerns were addressed.

The main issue which concerned us was that this current policy has not been adopted through proper due processes and consideration of Council.  This revised policy should be firstly commented on by Council and approved for public consultation; then amended as appropriate for formal adoption.  Without following through this required process, this document is technically illegal and contrary to the Local Government Act.

Council approved this revised policy (Minutes 10.2 of 17 August Meeting) despite three of us opposing it strongly on the grounds that comments and concerns put before Council on the draft policy were ignored, in particular the issue with the 3 basic common law rules which applies to natural justice and procedural fairness which were dismissed and not included in the Procedures.

Since we have raised our concerns with the Council, we have been publicly criticized by other Elected Members and harassed to sign this document against our will.

It is our opinion that the current document “Code of Conduct policy and procedures” is illegal and unconstitutional for the following reasons:

• The revised policy has not been legally adopted because the resolution passed at the August Meeting was merely an approval in principle being a first step leading up to the adoption and implementation of the policy;
• There was no specific resolution passed by Council requiring Elected Members to sign the document;
• Due to substantial alterations made to the original ‘policy & procedures’, the revised document must be taken back to the community for further comments prior to formal consideration of adoption of the policy;
• The ‘3 basic common laws’ for natural justice were absent in the document;
• ‘Right of Appeal’ clause deleted from the original policy is a breach of the Commonwealth of Australia Constitutional Law.

Given the reasons outlined above and while we are happy to respect Council’s decision on approving the Code, we believe that this policy has not been formally adopted by Council.  To date our concerns have not been responded to by the Council.

I therefore reject the unwarranted criticism on Cr Chirgwin for failing to sign the Code.