Man, proud man,
Dressed in a little brief authority,
Dressed in a little brief authority,
Most ignorant of what he’s most assured,
His glassy essence, like an angry ape,
Plays such fantastic tricks before high heaven
As make the angels weep.
SHAKESPEARE: Measure for
Measure, Act 2 Sc. 2
More on the Fitz Gerald Report
In my previous post, I discussed Acting CEO
Simpson’s unsupported claim that five separate agencies had thoroughly investigated
allegations made in the Fitz Gerald Report against councillors and officials, and
found them to be without foundation.
I indicated that in the absence of precise
information about the nature, scope, purpose and authorship of those
investigations, there is no reason why anybody should give credence to anything
Mr. Simpson says about them.
I challenge Mr. Simpson to make the reports
of those agencies, if such reports exist, available to the public without
delay.
One thing that has struck several people as
odd is that individuals mentioned in the Fitz Gerald Report as having complained to
Mr. Fitz Gerald about misconduct on the part of Shire councillors and officials
have denied ever having been approached by the CCC or any other agency seeking
to investigate their complaints.
Yet Mr. Simpson states that the Shire ‘has
consulted…with some of the people named in the Fitz Gerald Report’. Presumably those consulted were people
against whom allegations were made—not the ones who had made the allegations.
Why Mr. Simpson thinks we should have the
slightest regard in this context for the opinions of ‘LGIS Legal’—the Shire’s
insurers’ lawyers—‘two legal firms [and] the Office of the Minister for Local
Government’ is totally baffling.
Did they investigate the allegations? If so, did they approach the people who
claimed in the Fitz Gerald Report to have suffered at the hands of Shire
councillors and employees?
Apparently not.
Maybe I haven’t been keeping up with the
times, but it’s my understanding that when investigating bodies, for example
the police, determine to find out the truth about an instance of alleged
wrongdoing, they consider it best practice and good form to talk to the alleged
victim as well as the alleged perpetrator.
In this case, it seems very likely that the
Shire ‘consulted’ only the alleged perpetrators. Not best practice, and certainly not good form. If I’m wrong, Mr. Simpson, prove it,
and I will happily publish a retraction.
Who would credit it?
Whatever kind of ‘investigation’ Mr.
Simpson claims to have taken place would presumably have cleared a former CEO of all wrongdoing.
However, Mr. Simpson does concede that ‘to
provide clarity’ the Shire has changed its policy regarding use of the
corporate credit and fuel cards.
To provide clarity? Weasel words, Mr. Simpson. As it happens, many of us already have
a pretty clear idea of how the credit card was being used while that former CEO had
charge of it. Some among us have
obtained full details of corporate credit card expenditure for the period from
2008 to 2013, when CEO Hooper and his followers on Council withheld them from
public scrutiny.
Just publish those details, unedited, on
the Shire’s website. That’s the
kind of clarity York residents need.
Mr. Simpson also proposes making ‘minor
changes’ to the ‘Attendance at Conferences Policy’. What changes?
Will they include a provision to ensure that the Shire isn’t called upon
to meet the accommodation and other expenses of the spouses of Shire
staff?
We have documentary evidence of that kind
of thing occurring. Would it have
been permitted by the policy as it stands now or previously stood?
Whose report is it anyway?
As everyone knows, the Fitz Gerald Report was
commissioned and paid for by the Shire Council under the leadership of Shire
President Matthew Reid.
The Council earmarked $20,000 for the
report. According to Mr. Simpson,
the report and ‘associated legal fees’ together ‘cost $77,700 to investigate
and produce’.
It appears that, according to Mr. Simpson,
the Shire has put $57,700 into the pockets of its friends in the legal
profession for advice on the report. Why? What
legal issues arising from the report could possibly justify such an
expense?
Alternatively, has someone sued the Shire,
or threatened to sue, and received one of those confidential payouts that
lawyers love to broker? If so, why
haven’t we been told? (This
alternative seems unlikely, unless Mr. Simpson’s understanding of the meaning
of ‘fee’ deviates from the common interpretation.)
Mr. Simpson tells us that neither a hard
copy nor an electronic version of the report was lodged with the Shire. He neglects to remind us that
councillors Boyle, Hooper and Duperouzel met in private with then Acting CEO
Keeble in order to suppress the report.
Not one of those councillors declared an
interest, even though each was adversely mentioned in the report and therefore
stood to benefit from suppressing it.
It remains open for a future council to
reverse the decision to suppress the report, and to release it from
‘quarantine’ as Mr. Simpson poetically refers to its present location.
Meanwhile, I take issue with Mr. Simpson’s
idea that he has the right to ‘quarantine’ the report. That right belongs to Council, not to
him, and ‘Council’, in other words the Commissioner, hasn’t voted on it yet.
Of course he will get his way, because his
relationship with the Commissioner seems closely to resemble former CEO
Hooper’s with certain councillors—i.e. one of administrative dominance and
submission, or fifty shades of Ray.
From a moral viewpoint, Mr. Simpson and his
acolyte Mr. Best ought to leave the Fitz Gerald Report well alone. It doesn’t belong to them. It belongs to the people of York, who
paid for it, and their elected councillors.
From a practical viewpoint, they might as
well leave it alone, because an electronic version is freely available on the
Internet. You can find it at http://shireofyork6302fitzgerald.blogspot.com.au/
.
Taking a swipe at the blog
Both Mr. Best and Mr. Simpson have told many
people that they don’t like either this blog or the one, now restored, that
preceded it. The blogs seem to represent,
in the biblical phrase, a thorn in their sides. Poetic justice, some might say.
All the more surprising, then, that Mr. Simpson
should be so hell-bent on promoting this blog. He has done that to great effect in the agenda for the June
Council meeting.
However, what Mr. Simpson says about the
blog is rather less than accurate and not at all flattering. To begin with, he gets the name wrong. This blog is not called ‘Voice of
York’, which is the title of the fortnightly anodyne spray from the
Commissioner in York and Districts
Community Matters. Instead, it
goes under the name The REAL Voice of
York.
Secondly, it did sport the sub-heading ‘The
new official unofficial site’ (Mr. Simpson has omitted the word ‘new’) but I
have removed that description out of consideration for his blood pressure.
Mr. Simpson is at pains to let the world
know that the Shire of York ‘has no connection to this blog or its previous
incarnation’, and further, that ‘the Shire does not endorse its contents and it
in no way represents the views or opinions of the Shire of York’.
Good God, who would have thought it?
Given the respective sizes of our Internet
footprints, it would be more accurate to say that this blog has no connection
with the Shire of York, so I’ve used a statement to that effect as the blog’s
new sub-heading.
Not content with disparaging the blog, Mr.
Simpson goes on to remind us that the Shire ‘is obliged to create
and maintain a safe workplace for its employees…and will take all steps
necessary to protect staff and the reputation of the organisation and not allow
that to be infringed’.
Like what, Mr Simpson? How can you expect me to cower in a corner if you don't tell me what steps you intend to take?
Try as I might, I fail to see how the blog
is a threat to the Shire’s employees.
I am not a terrorist. I
don’t go in for guns, bombs, knives or poison. I don’t encourage suicide bombings. I abhor violence. My métier is black marks on a page.
I suspect that Mr. Simpson has an authoritarian
cast of mind. CEO Hooper used to tell his staff that he and they, and not
elected councillors or residents, were the real power in the shire.
That proposition is based on a warped
interpretation of the Local Government Act, but I believe the Minister for
Local Government and the DLGC also subscribe to it. I suspect that Acting CEO Simpson subscribes to it too.
It’s a proposition that would meet with approval
in the People’s Republic of North Korea, where bullying the population is even
more rife among public servants than it was for many years here in
York.
A corollary view is that local
government employees are a protected species who must have immunity from any
form of criticism. To make matters
worse, they are permitted, even encouraged, to scuttle away on stress leave
whenever someone blows them a satirical raspberry.
You know, that might explain the otherwise inexplicable
silliness of Mr. Simpson’s threatening words.
I have in my head a picture of a tearful
shire employee, fearful of distressing truths that may be told on the blog and
uncomfortable questions that may be raised, pleading with Mr. Simpson for
protection.
And there being no fool like an old fool,
he falls for it, says ‘There, there’ and shakes his puny fist at the blog and me.
There’s a saying sometimes attributed to a
former president of the USA: ‘If
you can’t stand the heat, get out of the kitchen’. It’s an axiom Mr. Simpson might consider impressing on his
staff. If criticism worries them,
let them respond in kind, or he can respond in kind for them.
Answer the critics, don’t try to shut them
down as somebody did with the other blog (only to get a flea in the ear from
Google).
James Plumridge, reporting from New Pyongyang.
*********
NEWSFLASH: Last night, signs posted on properties bordering the Great
Southern Highway between York and Allawuna were whited out.
The signs had been erected in protest
against the proposed SITA rubbish dump at Allawuna.
Firefighters were called because two trailers
on which signs were mounted had been set alight—according to one firefighter,
apparently with a blowtorch.
Police are investigating.
Although most York residents oppose the
proposed dump, there are a few who would stand to benefit if SITA is permitted
to go ahead with it.
However, there is currently no suggestion that
anyone from York was responsible for the damage.
The Fishers are relocating from their home/buisiness on Panmure Road, York, to Fairways Farm on the corner of Ashworth Road and the York - Lakes Road.
ReplyDeleteTwo years ago, the Fishers lost a bidding war to purchase Balladong farm. They intended to relocate trucks and a recycling plant from Crawford Court to Balladong Farm. Luckily for York, the Fishers were outbid by a local businessman who intends to operate Balladong as a tourist attraction.
Allegedly, the Fishers have been busy cutting some deal with Commissioner Best, enabling them to recycle rubbish and park their rubbish collection vehicles at Fairways Farm. Considering the likelihood of the new SITA application (Allawuna) going ahead, the Fisher's new location is perfect.
The public need to keep a vigilant eye open for events or activities that are 'strange' (no pun intended).
Commissioner Best seems to have some strange ideas about how the shire should do business with respect to planning.
DeleteHe has told at least two ratepayers beset by planning issues that if they employ an outfit called Glenwarra to assist them, their applications will go through without a hitch.
Glenwarra? Isn't that Jacky Jurmann's business name?
Yes, it is. Jacky and her husband Tim both used to work for the shire. She was the planning officer, Tim the building inspector.
Readers may remember the allegation that a senior shire official authorised Tim to use a shire vehicle for the purpose of bringing a horse from NSW, with unfortunate consequences, it was said, for a South Australian kangaroo.
Nice to know that Shire of York is taking a friendly interest in the economic welfare of a former employee.
BTW James, how is the FOI request going, when will we see some of the documents that everyone's hard earns have paid for ??
DeleteRe FOI: I responded to a similar comment on 17 June.
DeleteBriefly, DLGC's first response to our application is now subject to external review, i.e. by the FOI Commissioner.. Tomorrow I will return their second response to them for internal review, which I've no doubt will also in due course have to be submitted for external review.
They sent me some documents a while ago but the only one worth looking at was the David Morris briefing paper that let the cat out of the bag regarding Cr Pat Hooper's 'minority report' (to which of course they have denied access). You may remember that briefing paper was published on the old blog months ago.
Meanwhile, DLGC have issued an invoice for $2127 for the work they claim to have already done, on top of the $998 that had to be paid by way of deposit. That invoice includes $84 for photocopying documents to which they've denied access. My guess is that they will refuse to part with a single piece of paper until that money has been paid. There's about $650 left in the kitty.
Initially the DLGC estimated their charges at more than $5000, but I applied for a discount and there were further minor reductions.
Ever had the feeling you're being dudded? The truth is that FOI is a wonderful idea 'more honoured in the breach than the observance'. Brad 'Probity' Jolly is dealing with our application, despite a conflict of interest the size of a house. I've protested, but to no avail.
It could be months, if ever, before anything of value is released, but there are some promising signs. One thing I've discovered by inference from information provided is that several members of the Shire administration, as well as the old guard councillors we know about, communicated directly with the DLGC during the period leading up to the council's suspension. No prizes for guessing who they might have been and what they probably said, but I'll just say that a recent staff appointment may have made the present council's future untenable as I believe it was meant to do.
Senior bureaucrats in the DLGC, and the minister himself, will in my opinion do everything in their power to ensure that the truth never comes out.
The FOI Act is something of a paper tiger. Never mind, 'say not the struggle naught availeth' and in Mr Jolly's celebrated words, 'We don't just cross our fingers and hope'.
I intend to write a more detailed account of my adventures in the looking-glass world of FOI. Meanwhile, please be patient. I've a lot on my plate right now.
As one of those interviewed by Mr. Mike Fitz Gerald I will be forever grateful to Matthew Reid and Mr. Fitz Gerald for their time and patience. At least Matthew and Mike were prepared to listened.
ReplyDeleteI witnessed first hand the distress, heartache and financial crippling caused to at least four York residents and I never want to see that happen to anyone ever again in this Town.
Mr. Fitz Gerald spent many more hours on the report than he was ever paid for and it is totally unfair and disgusting his Report is being maligned by those who simply do not want to acknowledge anything ever happened.
Whether the Report is 'perfect' or suits who ever the Legal practitioner is, is irrelevant, at least it was done.
All but the guilty are grateful someone 'leaked' the Report and whether Mr. Simpson and Mr. Best like it, it has now been read by thousands of people and every single one of them will make up their own mind on the validity of the information.
Following a Shire meeting, James Best made a point of coming up to speak with me when I was with another Resident at the time, who was speaking with someone from the Shire. I decided to take the opportunity to ask JB when the Fitz Gerald Report (FGR) would be dealt with. I also used the chance to tell him how my life had been impacted by what had happened. He put his hand on my shoulder and said he had called for a copy of the FGR and had read it. He then went onto to tell me one of the things he would be doing is 'addressing the issues' in that Report. I asked him if he believed what he had read and he said yes, and then commented he thought the ex CEO was quite evil. JB 'appeared' to show empathy, understanding and deep concern for all the residents named in the FGR.
I believed James Best would fulfil the promise - the Late Report indicates that promise has been broken.
For the record, I have not been consulted about the Fitz Gerald Report by the A/CEO Simpson and I am yet to meet any of those interviewed who were.
I personally do not care if there is ever an investigation into the FGR because I know one day those responsible (at all levels) for the grief and tears will be held accountable for what they have done. I believe two of those targeted should be compensated for the damage done to their business.
Sooner or later Society will accept nothing less than totally honest accountable people to represent them at all levels of Government. I believe we have started that process here in York by having Matthew Reid and David Wallace represent us and they were fortunate to still have Denese Smythe in Council to stand with them
Roma, did any of the investigating agencies mentioned by Mr Simpson get in touch with you to check the veracity of your complaints?
ReplyDeleteTo your knowledge, did that happen to any of the other complainants?
No James, none of the agencies listed in the Shire Agenda made contact with me.
ReplyDeleteI believe a resident (not involved in the Fitz Gerald Report, (but un-impressed with the way it has been buried) has phoned a number of those listed as being interviewed by Fitz Gerald and so far has not found anyone who has been consulted.
Interesting that certain people with so much to say about the FitzGerald Report were conspicuous by their absence at yesterdays Council meeting.
ReplyDeleteYes, it is interesting. If, as I suppose, your comment was directed at me, I had more than one very good reason for not being there.
DeleteSeveral people have told me what happened at the meeting. Apparently it was a shambles. Many questions were asked and foolish or evasive answers given. I doubt that my knowledge and understanding of the Fitz Gerald Report would have been broadened and deepened by listening to Mr Best and Mr Simpson fielding questions to which they could have had no adequate response unless prepared to deal in inconvenient truths, which apparently they were not.
Interesting that a person with something smart to say about somebody's absence from a meeting has nothing to say that would tell readers who they are.
James, I agree with your comments about the smart person commenting on absences. Perhaps Anonymous 14:03 was having a shot at me, if so, I too had a very good reason - a friend needed my help.
ReplyDeleteI made a commitment two months ago to drive a friend to Swan Districts Hospital for day surgery, we arrived back in York at 6pm.
Luckily for those of us unable to attend, many people did go to the council meeting on Monday. They had what Dame Edna would have called 'a very nice night's entertainment'.
ReplyDeleteFrom all accounts, public question time was a riot. It's supposed to last 15 minutes. It went on for about an hour. To give him credit, Commissioner Best, nervously ensconced in the president's chair, waited for quite some time before attempting (and initially failing) to bring the session to an end. The unruly citizens of York had him on a hook, and were very unwilling to let him off it.
At one point, Mr Julian Krieg of the Men's Shed interrogated the commissioner on the topic of his immediate future. Would he be staying on as a 'monitor' in York? Well, said the commissioner, Minister Tony Simpson (catcalls) had advertised for expressions of interest and asked him to submit one (groans) which he had done (more groans). If appointed, what emolument would he receive? He wouldn't say (wry chuckles) but the Department, not ratepayers, would bear the cost (murmurs of approbation and relief).
The commissioner said he knew he wasn't popular in York (assenting nods). York wasn't like other places (cries of 'hear, hear' and stamping of feet) where he had accomplished wonderful and amazing things (raucous laughter).
The Commissioner appeared decidedly uncomfortable when questioned about statements to the media touching on allegations supposedly investigated by the CCC. He said the CCC had appointed him as the investigator (cries of 'pull the other one', 'what-ho Sherlock' and 'the name's Best - James Best').
Where, then, was his report of those investigations? No comment (expressions of indignation). Were those allegations the ones contained in the Fitz Gerald Report? No, they were not. What were they then? He was not at liberty to say (peals of satirical laughter).
Ms Liz Christmas asked what was the meaning of the acronym PRR and why weren't the words thus represented properly spelled out? The commissioner replied that PRR is not an acronym (whispers of 'wish I'd paid more attention when I was at school') but an abbreviation referring to an outlandishly expensive public relations firm in Perth currently soaking up truckloads of ratepayers' dollars for writing ecstatic prose in the local rag about the Commissioner's envisionings and ideations regarding the future of York.
Shire President Reid asked if the Commissioner had a copy of Cr Pat 'Stool Pigeon' Hooper's so-called 'Minority Report' to the Minister (cries of 'go for it, Matthew') and if so, could he, as Shire President, have a read of it. Yes, bro, I have a copy, thanks very much, but no, you can't read it, even though you're the elected shire president and I'm just a carpetbagger-cum-ministerial stooge, because it's a confidential document, so up yours, cobber, spin on this (shuffling of chairs, snorts of derision and disgust).
When at last the meeting proper got going, most members of the public went home, no doubt to the commissioner's great relief.
You may find the official minutes more accurate and detailed than this summary but a lot less invigorating. Or the reverse.
[My thanks to those community-minded individuals who provided the basis for this brief account of public question time, York, 22 June 2015.]
I am looking forward to the July Ordinary Council meeting when our democratically elected Shire President Matthew Reid and Crs. Smythe and Wallace return.
DeleteIt was not a riot!
DeleteJust because question time goes past the 15 minutes doesn't mean the citizens of York are "unruly"!
People were calm and controlled, with the exception of one person who was understandably distraught.
I take exception to your comments, you profess to be on the side of the ratepayers, then go on to portray us as a rabble, who's side are you on?
Of course people were calm and controlled. Of course York ratepayers are not a rabble.
DeleteIt's called 'comedy', otherwise known as having a laugh.
My target was J B, not the good people of York. It was a bit of fun. I'm sorry you didn't see the funny side of it. I forgot that many people are not gifted with a sense of humour. It never occurred to me that anyone would take what I had written seriously.
As the philosopher said, the world is a comedy to those who think, a tragedy to those who feel.
Whose side am I on? I am always on the side of the angels.
(Perhaps you're having a laugh, too!)
CORRECTION:My friend Jane Ferro tells me that my tongue-in-cheek account of Monday's council meeting was inaccurate in this respect, that it was she who asked questions attributed to Julian Krieg, although Julian followed up on them.
DeleteI apologise to both of them, not only for my mistake, but also for associating them in any way with that scurrilous composition for which an angry reader has quite properly dragged me over hot coals. I doubt I will be showing my face in public again for at least a week.
James, I enjoyed your tongue-in-cheek account of the Council Meeting - thank you.
DeleteI have spent too many years crying over what has been done to our beautiful Town by the councillors who, I believe, misused the trust they were given by the community and then added further insult by allowing the CEO to lead them by the nose.
Roll on July.
James I agree with your previous dissenters I'm afraid. The gallery has been accused of being a "pack of wild dogs" in the past by then Shire President Tony Boyle and others. I think you do a diservice to the attendees with talk of stamping feet etc. I appreciate your sense of humour, I really do, but if the blog is to be taken seriously you cant have it both ways. Please dont take personal offence and keep up the good work.
DeleteWell, it looks like I can't please all the people all the time.
DeleteI don't take offence. I would point out, though, that throughout history humour, including ridicule, have often been recruited to the cause of reform. As I've said before, ridicule is the atom bomb of the powerless. It's hard work trying to keep the bastards honest, but they really hate being laughed at. It makes them angry, and when they get angry, they're inclined to trip themselves up.
I didn't know former shire president Boyle had called the gallery 'a pack of wild dogs'. What a disgraceful and disrespectful thing to do. From now on, he shall be known in these columns as Tony 'Wild Dog' Boyle. (Makes him sound like a bushranger - he'll like that!)
By all means James I like the wild dog Boyle bit I just dont like making a mockery of the gallery is all. Like I said keep up the good work. It matters little how I feel about it at any rate in the big scheme of things.
DeleteWhat does it matter who asked the Question? it needed to be asked and it was asked.
DeleteWhat does it matter who made it to the meeting and who didn't? some people have been attending meetings for nearly a decade and some one wants to have a go that's sad. We do have lives family's and commitments, I would love to be able to be two places at once.
What does it matter if people get upset at a meeting? what there is a law against being angry, upset, depressed, distraught again some of these issues at meetings have been going with no resolution for nearly a decade.
What's with the who's side are you on ? I am at a total loss at that remark bloody hell go figure if that isn't obvious I don't know what is, its not a nice thing to say to some one who it is more obvious where they stand and some have stood for as I have said nearly a decade.
James Plumridge has stuck his neck out and is one of a few who stands by his integrity and comments under his own name and is helping people that are quite frankly exhausted, brain bashed and wounded in more ways than one keeping the truth out there. Well done . for the rest stay focused don't let your guard down. Don't let the bastards get you down we are closer than ever for the truth to rein supreme.
I agree with Ho Hum, James Plumridge is doing this community a great service.
DeleteHe did not need to stick his neck out or put his head above the crowd. But he has, and every single person, barring those bastards who created the mess, should be grateful he is giving of his time and expertise to help us all.
I have put up with ridicule for years in this town and been deliberately avoided by many for fear they may become contaminated in some way.
For just once please stop kicking those who are trying to help you.
Onya, James. Smacks of 'truth or dare', and caused a great chuckle at the end of the day.
ReplyDeleteSome years ago, I recall 'Inside Cover' in the West Australian referred to the York Council meeting as a three ring Circus, seems I missed the return visit yesterday.
ReplyDeleteThe Fitz Report has not been investigated by any Agency!!
ReplyDeleteSo the CCC usually apoint a police officer or forensic auditor or similar to investigate on their behalf but on this occasion they contracted James Best. Nothing illegal there but highly immoral and talk about conflicts of interest.
ReplyDeleteSo the CCC write to the SOY and say there is a pending investigation. JB then investigates on the CCC's dime (and possibly double dipping on our dime) and then he presents his findings to the CCC.
Then the CCC write back to the SOY and say the investigation is done. WTF?
James Best have you absolutely no shame.
I think we know the answer to your final question, Tanya.
DeleteI don't believe that the CCC would have contracted JB to investigate whatever allegations they were interested in. So far as I know he has had no training as an investigator, and as you rightly point out, there would have been a serious conflict of interest, not to mention the possibility of double dipping.
He must have been 'misquoted' - again.
Given the recent bad publicity about corruption within their ranks, I doubt the CCC would risk being caught out investigating a Local Government area by contracting out an investigation to a person appointed by Minister for Local Government G. Simpson to be Commissioner of the same area being investigated.
DeleteWhere is a copy of his so called report?
There is no copy of the report and never will be as CCC reports are confidential. I can assure you the DLG appointed Commissioner James Best was appointed by the CCC to investigate on their behalf. Exactly what the scope of the investigation was we'll never really know. He was asked directly at the most recent council meeting and he confirmed it to be true.
DeleteBill, how do you know that the CCC appointed the commissioner to investigate? If he was so appointed, what allegations was he asked to investigate? Did they relate to the FG Report (I thought he said they didn't)? On what basis was he appointed? It all seems very murky to me.
DeleteIf what you're saying is correct, it appears that someone in his position can tell a major government investigating agency in confidence - i.e. total secrecy - whatever he likes with nobody having the right to contradict him. Moreover, he can do so without being trained or qualified for the task. I don't think his degree in sociology and politics would be sufficient to qualify him for it. Perhaps, in a previous incarnation, he was the prototype of Inspector Clouseau of Pink Panther fame.
I think you will find that the CCC didn't appoint him as an "investigator".
DeleteThe process is for the CCC review team to refer the complaint(s) back to the Shire of York (Commissioner) for his assessment and or investigation and for the Shire of York (commissioner) to send a report of what's been done .
Section 40 (3) of the CCC Act.
The Commission may, by written notice, direct the appropriate
authority to give the Commission a detailed report on —
(a) action the appropriate authority has taken in relation to
the allegation;
Matthew Reid asked JB at the Council meeting and JB said yes. Unbeleivable maybe but still true. It should say so in the minutes if they choose to publish an accurate account of which there is never any guarantee
ReplyDeleteYes, Bill, it is unbelievable.
DeleteI'm still not clear as to whether J B was appointed, contracted or merely asked to carry out some kind of investigation.
Whatever the case, he shouldn't have been.
I wonder if he and G Simpson will ever pause to consider how much damage they have done and continue to do to the people of York.
James Best stated at the ordinary Council meeting he had interviewed all but two people re the Fitz Gerald Report. That statement was completely false, I know four people who were not contacted by Mr. Best.
DeleteWhat other 'false' information was provided to the CCC by Mr. Best?
Just heard the Shire of York purchased back a building they sold some time ago. "Chalkies".
DeleteNo consultation with the community at all. Good one Mr. Best - more debt for the Ratepayers.
It's ok for you Mr. Best, you don't even live here so it won't hurt your pocket.
And guess who the Shire purchased it from - none other than Mr. Bests best friends - the Blisses!
I think it is safe to say James Best pissed off the majority of York at the meeting this evening.
DeleteMr. Bests friends 'the Blisses' will be ecstatic, they just sold the Shire of York a building the Shire previously 'off loaded' because it was too expensive to maintain.
Mr. Bests way of moving our Town forward - into more debt!
Well, the Shire hasn't quite bought the building yet, though there is an agreement, pending JB's passing it which he did and the state coughing up the loan (which he probably has assurance that they will). Lots and lots of Questions got asked on this matter, and no-one was happy about it. Some even 'frothing at the mouth' in a fairly civilized yet forthright manner. On this again he was left in no doubt as to his popularity. The other thing people were most upset about was the Budget being passed at all by JB instead of our elected Councillors. However, the advice JB said he'd received was it was best to pass it himself, as when the Councillors return in 12 days' time they won't have a majority vote, because they need all 4 of them to be there and they won't be. Ho hum.
DeleteIf the deal does go ahead, the people of York may choose where they have coffee or eat - as a silent protest.
DeleteI hope the agreement has a clause in it as to structural integrity of the building as the front wall is falling out last time I looked.
DeleteJB said in the meeting that an engineer had found the building's structural integrity fine. Of course, we don't know who the engineer was.
DeleteMr. Best needs to provide the community with the Engineers written report on the integrity of the building.
DeleteSounds a bit like the 'out of date' valuation certificate for the Convent Tender provided to the Shire by the husband of a Staff member.
Gotta check out Ray Hoopers letter on the other blogspot. Still trying to bully Council.
ReplyDeleteI read Ray Hoopers pathetic letter - shireofyork6302blogspot.com.
DeleteClaiming he was forced to resign is absolute bull shit. He did not have the guts to be confronted by OUR Council about the written complaints made against him.
Further to Ray Hoopers letter dated 8th October, 2014.
DeleteRay, the people of York were thankful when you finally realised you were no longer wanted here.
To quote one of your favourite sayings - it was in the best interest of the community.
Oh by they way, you can be assured the people in York will never forget you. You will always be part of this Historic Towns history. I have a feeling at some time in the near future you will be publicly recognised for many of the things you did during your time here in York.
All the people that were in the Fitz Gerald report, if that is what the CCC so called investigated and cleared of any wrong doing. Were not spoken to regarding all facts of complaint should voice there disagreement to the CCC in writing. The version of the so called truth may be different to that of some one I call Yorks Best Fork Tongue Ever . so called uncovered blood and guts under each rock was trying to stem the blood flow as it was haemorrhageing. Well Mr Best the blood vessel has ruptured.
ReplyDeleteThanks Mr Best. You are a very vindictive man for getting your own back on a town that has rejected you. I congratulate Mr and Mrs Bliss. They wined, dined and flattered you. Their reward, the sale of " Chalkies" sold to the Shire well above current valuation. They have used you and I am sure they are well pleased that you have thrown them a lifeline. However, we Yorkies are lumbered with a useless building and saddled with unnecessary debt. Thanks Mr Best for giving us yet another lesson in cronyism.
ReplyDeleteWild Cat you are spot on.
DeleteThis may very well back fire on Mr. & Mrs. Bliss. I heard Mr. Bliss was thinking of nominating for Council, if that is true, I doubt many in York would trust him after this 'behind closed door deal'.
How come Mr. & Mrs. Bliss were able to open the York Palace Hotel when there is no disable access to the building off Avon Terrace? Did Mr. Best have anything to do with that law not being adhered to?
Will James Best list this as one of his achievements?
Delete'Pseudo Banker' facilitates cash flow to anointed York business couple.
For the same reason they have a tavern license and are not doing the minimum hours to adhere to that license. For the same reason Richard Bliss built stonehenge at the back of Faversham and had backdated retrospective approval from the healthy. For the same reason Faversham has a revamped servants quarters with no approval. The the same reasons The York has removed an upstairs wall with no approval. Because they are better than everyone else! BOYCOTT THE YORK HOTEL.
DeleteAs for JB I cant find the words to describe how angry I am with you.
Talk on the Terrace today - people intend boycotting the York Hotel.
DeleteAdd this new debt to our list of complaints against JB and GS. Their intransigence to the will of the ratepayers - the ones who will be paying for this debacle - must go right to the top. Let's advise the opposition and petition them to raise this matter in Parliament - to inform all and sundry the damage done by someone who, no doubt, is in training to be another underhanded politician. That is, unless South Perth - rumoured to be the seat reserved for JB - rejects him on the basis of the high rises he boasts about having arranged for their town.
ReplyDeleteJust heard the Shire of York has just appointed another un-qualified D/CEO - Ms. Mazuik.
ReplyDeleteBill - just because Mr. Best said he had been appointed by the CCC does not mean it is the truth.
ReplyDeleteJames 'Pinocchio' Best has been caught out about the number of people he claims to have contacted re the Fitz Gerald Report. There's four who have not been contacted by him, even though he is claiming he has contacted all but two.
If I had of known that James Best was handling the complaints of miss conduct against the shire, for or on behalf of the CCC, I would have given him copies of the evidence I have. Now I am going to send them to the CCC as I believe the case should be reopened due to the misconduct of Mr Best or whoever was in charge of the investigation.
DeleteDoes this mean that Ray Hooper could now go for a compensation claim? over My Dead Body ...........
HO HUM, can you tell us if you were interviewed by James Best re the Fitz Gerald Report or are your complaints another issue?
DeleteI talked to Mike Fitzgerald when he was here. at no time was I aware I was being interviewed about the Fitzgerald report, when I talked to James Best about a recent issue.
DeleteHO HUM,
DeleteIf James Best interviewed any person for the CCC regarding the Fitz Gerald Report, he would have, by Law, been obliged to advise them, prior to the interview starting, that he was acting for the CCC.
Those interviewed by Mr. Mike Fitz Gerald for the Report, should have a meeting and discuss where to take this.
I agree absolutely anon 18:48 James Best has acted in a fraudulent manner to obtain benefit, probably pecuniary. I am currently drafting a letter to the CCC, this was not carried out professionally or lawfully. I am happy to join forces with all affected by this absolutely disgraceful man and his LG crooked cronies.
DeleteOne point Talking to James Best about the town in general one day, James Best said to me that 'people wanted him to make Ray Hooper pay for his actions' he said that 'he couldn't do that because it was not what he was here for', well James telling the Truth about what transpired and being upfront and telling us what your actually here for instead of lying and not actually investigating truthfully with integrity, I know for a fact the few people you had following you are now beyond irate.
If James you had half a brain the main core of your little get together at the Castle Hotel was that the Shire had not acted honestly, but present were people who were willing to work with a honest and open council in order to move forward, not some two bit bullshit artist from Perth, who thought he was doing over a few people that were brave enough to stand up and be heard in the Fitz Gerald report they spoke for all that cried out for change at the last election - which was majority of adults of voting age in the Shire Of York.
HO HUM - I agree, lets join forces.
DeleteWould you please consider emailing James Plumridge with your name as he knows the names of the other people who have not been interviewed by James Best re the FGR.
anonymous 22:48 I will let James Plumridge know, but I also add I am not aware of any one that has been so called interviewed by James Best or Graeme Simpson in regard to the Fitz Gerald report, I have actually been asked by several people, so I am guessing that everyone who voiced complaints to Michael Fitz Gerald should and would be included in getting together. The misconduct that occurred was serious and I believe even if they had of talked to Best their complaints were not expressed in his investigation. They couldn't have been with the outcome from the CCC clearing them of misconduct.
DeleteI have been involved with a CCC investigation and if a complaint is put in on your behalf or you are specifically a part in that investigation, you are entitled to a copy of what has been put in on your behalf ask Pat Hooper he tried to keep me out of one !!!!
DeleteThank you Ho Hum. I am one of those interviewed by Mike Fitz Gerald and I have personally spoken to three others. None of us were interviewed by James Best re the Fitz Gerald Report.
DeleteYes, everyone who was interviewed by MFG and wants to be included in the meeting to decide what to do will be.
Lets see if Mr best will buy more buildings and screw York over. Sorry we don't brown nose him like the Blisses.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous 23:56 Don't ever be sorry, you still have your self respect!
DeleteJames Best why are you telling people the Jazz Festival didnt go ahead because of the blog? I have heard that from several people now who heard it directly from you. You and I know exactly why it didnt go ahead. Is there no end to the lies you will tell? You truly are a low life.
ReplyDeleteTanya, he has to blame someone. It's called the deflection syndrome.
ReplyDeleteTanya, please tell the world what happened to the Jazz Festival! You and I know it had nothing to do with the blog. No doubt J B will blame every aspect of his failure in York on the blog. I've got broad shoulders, I can take it.
DeleteI know of 8 contained in the Fitzgerald report that may have had conversations with James Best but were not aware they were being interrogated for the CCC report not only that of those people named in the Fitzgerald report a number on both sides of the fence accused and complainants who have never even talked to James Best at all.
ReplyDeleteNice to know there was concern about his fellow neighbours back in 2009.
ReplyDeleteMINUTES – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING 21 SEPTEMBER 2009 page 8
Mr Rob Chester
Question 1: Is there any way of protecting the broadacre farmers from the huge increases in rates due to the sale of small properties in the local area affecting the paper values of their land?
Response: At a future meeting with the Minister for Agriculture these issues will be raised. The Shire of York is very aware of this and the need for protection of broadacre farmers.
Is there any protection for broadacre farmers who will have their properties devalued if the Landfill goes ahead.
ReplyDeleteSITA have lodged an application for a permit to clear land on Allawuna.
DeleteWho is protecting broad acre farming as an essential business in York?
James Best has probably signed a deal with SITA as well without us knowing.
DeleteTanya please tell people about why the Jazz Festival fell apart a good person like you don't need
ReplyDeleteQuestion for Tanya
1. Did Mrs Blisses Have anything to do with it.
2. The $30000 SOY seed funding for this event less expenses was going to the York Bazaar in September.
3. Tanya your grant writing had plenty of success. I was told over $100k can you tell us where this money is and who controlled it.
If Mrs Bliss killed the tourist committee (chairperson) what happen to cause this.
Questions for James Best Who in their right mind would think they could get all the information out of someone in a CCC investigation without telling them what he was doing? What do you think we go around telling everyone the details of what transpired with our lever arch files strapped to our backs containing all the proof? one word Imbecile. How you ever thought that was going to work I will never know with this being a small country town and the passion in the people for an honest and accountable Shire.
ReplyDeleteThere is an old quote Oh what a tangled web we weave, When first we practice to deceive!
Sir Walter Scott, Marmion, Canto vi. Stanza 17. Scottish author & novelist (1771 - 1832)