Open Letter
Why is it the South Gippsland Shire Council Administration has become increasingly shy of answering questions put to it on virtually any subject?
Instead of answering meaningfully, they habitually resort to ‘stonewalling’ tactics – ducking and weaving, selectively quoting out of context to reverse what the questioner actually said, so that the questioner is made to appear aggressive, or seemingly attacking the integrity of staff, when that was not intended at all. Why are these ‘word games’ even thought to be necessary? Most questions are straightforward – sometimes, of necessity, they are more convoluted.
More and more constrictions are placed on asking questions – like when and ‘how-to’ – and the 30-word limit. The situation has deteriorated to a point where perhaps it’s wise for Council to put out a list of English language words THEY consider offensive, so those seeking answers are not offended by being accused of being offensive. ‘Freedom of speech’ is a cornerstone of our Democratic society – or, at least, it’s supposed to be.
It’s a situation that’s rapidly getting far too costly for constituents, because this tardiness by Council leaves no option but to pursue the information sought via the Freedom of Information (FO!) route. FOI’s are anything but free ($80.64ph). I am a pensioner, currently with an unresolved FOI (lodged 16 January 2020) and have recently received a bill for $596.62 – that’s equal to 12 days out of a fortnightly pension. My appeal, on hardship grounds, was rejected – (yes, I can enter into a review process).
A conversation with the senior FOI Officer indicated my request is unlikely to conclude for many months yet. This approach to questions does not cost Council staff anything – their paydays just keep arriving – but, what is the cost to the ratepayers? The Council simply adds more staff (seemingly now) to the FOI team. The 2019-2020 Annual Report shows only 8 cases (that progressed beyond the initial request). What on earth are these people doing, besides sending out unintelligible ‘gobbledygook’ communications clearly intended to confuse the recipient?
It always comes back to: What is there to hide? It COULD be plenty, if this isn’t just ‘Empire Building’. Employees who believe they are engaged to work for the Administration, rather than for the advancement of the people of SGS, should be working elsewhere.
The oft espoused: “We are all in this together” has worn a bit thin!
Regards,
John McCombe
South Gippsland Action Group member
You must be logged in to post a comment.