Of course, history shows that the Minister failed to deliver on that promise and the Councillors opinions and points of view in response to what they considered an inaccurate Monitor report were buried under an effective gag order in so much as councillors were under threat of prosecution by the Inspectorate if they disclosed the submission contents.

The three Somyurek appointed administrators brought in their own version of a good governance action plan at the December 18th, 2019 Council meeting. That document was hardly more than a series of filing cabinet labels for what Council was supposed to be doing all along and as such had limited reference points to the Monitor report or the Commission of inquiry recommendations.

Council administrators also approved a 6-monthly report to the public indicating progress on those good governance framework plans. The only one so far brought to Council was in July 2020 and looked not too dissimilar to the normal annual council report. In that July report the only interesting part was where it indicated the following actions.

Ten initiatives under development include; 

1. Processes to undertake a ‘whole of Shire’ Community Vision;
2. Drafting the 2020/21-2023/24 Council Plan and 2020/21Annual Initiatives;
3. Investigating a Community Leadership Program to develop the skills and capabilities of existing and emerging leaders across the Shire;
4. Review and enhance communications on Council activities;
5. Review of Council Ordinary Meeting cycles and Briefing schedules;
6. Review of Policy C51 – Councillor Support and Expenditure Policy; 
7. Review of Policy C65 – Public Participation in Meetings with Council Policy; 
8. A new Managing Unreasonable Conduct policy;
9. Audit of the Capital Works program;10. Preparing the 2020/21 Annual Budget and long term financial plan, including a review of the long term Capital Works Program

Comments on this list:

1. Administrators postponed the Community to vision-cancelled until the next Council deals with it
3. Leadership program was established contrary to the Commissioner Inquiry recommendations.
4. Administrators increased advertising to newspapers in the Shire-but not this one
7. Public participation has been reduced and limited somewhat.
8. This is new and not developed yet-interesting whose behaviour they are referring to.

The other points are normal Council requirements for actions. 

This  administrators good governance plan is weak really and does not go anywhere near as far as the Councillor good governance action plan did to address issues raised in the Monitor and Commission of Inquiry reports. It will be interesting to see the comparison if Council bring the Councillor good governance action plan to Council in the February Council meeting as the existing Council resolution of May 8th, 2019 says should occur and whether they action resolution 3 and integrate it into the Council Plan and Budget.

Will the Council follow the directive given to them by the Councillors and allow the public to see for themselves what they should have been informed about at the time and as was the desire of the Councillors to put their side of the story on the record and to bring in needed change at Council which should be evident when the Councillor good governance action plan is read in its entirety?