I have been reading the agenda for tomorrow’s Council meeting
and have a few things puzzling me – one of them concerns the consultant Anne
Lake
This extract is from last year;
AMRSC ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 11
SEPTEMBER 2013
14.
NEW BUSINESS OF AN URGENT NATURE
14.2.
CEO
14.2.1
Independent Investigation into Alleged Misconduct by a Shire Employee
The
CEO declared an interest effecting impartiality as the document concerned makes
unsubstantiated allegations against shire employees, including the CEO, and the
CEO further advised that that was the reason why he had appointed a
well-respected independent HR consultant to conduct an investigation into the
production and distribution of the document.
The
CEO gave a verbal report on the interim findings of the independent
investigation undertaken into the production and distribution of a potentially
defamatory letter which is now reported to be widely circulating in the
community.
PROCEDURAL
MOTION / COUNCIL DECISION
CR
EARL, CR SMART OM1309/16
That
Council accepts Item 14.2.1 Independent Investigation into Alleged Misconduct
by a Shire Employee as new business of an urgent nature.
CARRIED
6/0
The
CEO recommended that this matter be discussed behind closed doors, with members
of the public excluded, as it relates to a shire employee and other employees.
PROCEDURAL
MOTION / COUNCIL DECISION
CR
EARL, CR SMART OM1309/17
That
Item 14.2.1 Independent Investigation into Alleged Misconduct by a Shire
Employee be moved behind closed doors as it relates to a shire employee and
other employees.
CARRIED
6/0
Members
of the public and press left chambers at 6.41pm.
Mr
Nick Logan, Mr David Nicholson and Ms Zoe Cunningham left chambers at 6.41pm. RECOMMENDATION / COUNCIL DECISION
CR
EARL, CR SERVENTY OM1309/1
That
Council:
1. Notes the progress of
the independent investigation and the interim findings of the investigator,
2. Authorises over budget expenditure
if required to complete the investigation which may be reimbursed by the Local
Government Insurance Services.
CARRIED 6/0
The following parapgraph is from the reports attached to
tomorrow’s meeting;
Page 63 paragraph 1;
“... Consultant’s costs due to an employee related investigation have been
largely offset by savings from the deferral of the internal audit to 2014-15”
Three things strike me about this;
1 – That the approval for over budget spending on a
consultant to investigate appears to be without any constraint – no clause
limiting it to $10K, or similar, was it open ended?
2 – No reference to when the Local Government Insurance
Services claim was lodged and whether a partial reimbursement was paid, or
whether the claim was rejected outright. What was the response?
3 – The deferral of the internal audit has been mentioned in
a very casual way here. No reference to when approval for that deferral was
made by Council.
If any of Deep Thought’s concerns were valid, or if circumstances arose that could potentially have created a perception within the community that they were valid, an internal audit is needed, urgently. An internal audit conducted with rigour is needed, and the sooner the better, if only to reassure ratepayers that all is well within the shire. A well conducted internal audit would also ensure that all controls within the institution are operating as they should be.
If any of Deep Thought’s concerns were valid, or if circumstances arose that could potentially have created a perception within the community that they were valid, an internal audit is needed, urgently. An internal audit conducted with rigour is needed, and the sooner the better, if only to reassure ratepayers that all is well within the shire. A well conducted internal audit would also ensure that all controls within the institution are operating as they should be.
