Clausen questions lord mayor over 'help session' for independent probe submissions
LORD mayor Ross Kerridge found himself in the hot seat at this week's council meeting over a session his campaign supporters held to help Novocastrians make submissions to an independent probe into the City of Newcastle.
More than 840 submissions were made to the Davidson Business Advisory review into the council's policies, processes and procedures.
Labor Cr Declan Clausen peppered independent Cr Kerridge with questions about the "appropriateness" of the Our Newcastle submission-writing session held by a group of people he described as having "conspiratorial views" about the administration of the council.
"That workshop specifically required or requested that participants send copies of their submissions to you in addition to submitting them to the Davidson review. Can you give us an idea about the volume of the submissions and how many of those might have come from Sydney?" Cr Clausen said.
"Having now considered the findings of the Davidson review, do you wish to comment on the appropriateness of that, given that it appears that a group of people had conspiratorial views, frankly, about the administration of council, that conspiracy theorists largely, based on the advice that we've been provided and how many of those claims were rebuked, worked together to create submissions believing some malfeasance in council, do you want to provide some comment on that?"
Our Newcastle is a grassroots group that was formally formed after the 2024 City of Newcastle local government elections and supported Cr Kerridge in his campaign.
The full 36-page review report was released late last week.
Cr Kerridge said he did not attend the help session on January 23 and was not involved in its organisation.
"I wasn't there, but certainly I know the Our Newcastle group offered to help people put in submissions," he said.
"Some of the people putting in submissions were not particularly technologically literate and just wanted assistance in doing that.
"I don't think there was anything illegitimate about the submissions."
An email written under the Our Newcastle letterhead invited recipients to drop in if they would like help with their submission or to chat through their ideas.
The letter requested recipients tell Our Newcastle when they had made a submission.
"No need to share any details - we're just trying to keep track of how many submissions are going in where we can," the letter said.
"This is a real chance to help shape how our council works - they're looking at everything from general governance to major projects."
Council papers revealed that the majority of more than 800 submissions to the review, some 70 per cent, were made from suburbs in Sydney.
That 70 per cent figure did not appear in the Davidson report.
Despite having access to a figure that was not made public in the report, the council and Davidson have repeatedly failed to answer questions from the Newcastle Herald about it.
Just this week, the Herald sent follow-up questions to the council asking how it got access to the 70 per cent figure, why it felt it was important to highlight it in a report to councillors, what steps, if any, the council took to verify the information and whether it is the result of an IP address issue or submitters entered Sydney postcodes.
Questions about key themes present in the Sydney-based submissions also went unanswered.
Instead, a City of Newcastle spokeswoman said the council placed no restriction on the identity or location of any person wishing to make a submission.
"Davidson has previously stated that when individuals made multiple submissions, it did not occur excessively," she said.
"Those that did make multiple submissions made additional submissions on multiple (separate) topics."
Of the 800 submissions received, 548 were made by individuals.
LORD mayor Ross Kerridge found himself in the hot seat at this week's council meeting over a session his campaign supporters held to help Novocastrians make submissions to an independent probe into the City of Newcastle.
More than 840 submissions were made to the Davidson Business Advisory review into the council's policies, processes and procedures.
Labor Cr Declan Clausen peppered independent Cr Kerridge with questions about the "appropriateness" of the Our Newcastle submission-writing session held by a group of people he described as having "conspiratorial views" about the administration of the council.
"That workshop specifically required or requested that participants send copies of their submissions to you in addition to submitting them to the Davidson review. Can you give us an idea about the volume of the submissions and how many of those might have come from Sydney?" Cr Clausen said.
"Having now considered the findings of the Davidson review, do you wish to comment on the appropriateness of that, given that it appears that a group of people had conspiratorial views, frankly, about the administration of council, that conspiracy theorists largely, based on the advice that we've been provided and how many of those claims were rebuked, worked together to create submissions believing some malfeasance in council, do you want to provide some comment on that?"
Our Newcastle is a grassroots group that was formally formed after the 2024 City of Newcastle local government elections and supported Cr Kerridge in his campaign.
The full 36-page review report was released late last week.
Cr Kerridge said he did not attend the help session on January 23 and was not involved in its organisation.
"I wasn't there, but certainly I know the Our Newcastle group offered to help people put in submissions," he said.
"Some of the people putting in submissions were not particularly technologically literate and just wanted assistance in doing that.
"I don't think there was anything illegitimate about the submissions."
An email written under the Our Newcastle letterhead invited recipients to drop in if they would like help with their submission or to chat through their ideas.
The letter requested recipients tell Our Newcastle when they had made a submission.
"No need to share any details - we're just trying to keep track of how many submissions are going in where we can," the letter said.
"This is a real chance to help shape how our council works - they're looking at everything from general governance to major projects."
Council papers revealed that the majority of more than 800 submissions to the review, some 70 per cent, were made from suburbs in Sydney.
That 70 per cent figure did not appear in the Davidson report.
Despite having access to a figure that was not made public in the report, the council and Davidson have repeatedly failed to answer questions from the Newcastle Herald about it.
Just this week, the Herald sent follow-up questions to the council asking how it got access to the 70 per cent figure, why it felt it was important to highlight it in a report to councillors, what steps, if any, the council took to verify the information and whether it is the result of an IP address issue or submitters entered Sydney postcodes.
Questions about key themes present in the Sydney-based submissions also went unanswered.
Instead, a City of Newcastle spokeswoman said the council placed no restriction on the identity or location of any person wishing to make a submission.
"Davidson has previously stated that when individuals made multiple submissions, it did not occur excessively," she said.
"Those that did make multiple submissions made additional submissions on multiple (separate) topics."
Of the 800 submissions received, 548 were made by individuals.
LORD mayor Ross Kerridge found himself in the hot seat at this week's council meeting over a session his campaign supporters held to help Novocastrians make submissions to an independent probe into the City of Newcastle.
More than 840 submissions were made to the Davidson Business Advisory review into the council's policies, processes and procedures.
Labor Cr Declan Clausen peppered independent Cr Kerridge with questions about the "appropriateness" of the Our Newcastle submission-writing session held by a group of people he described as having "conspiratorial views" about the administration of the council.
"That workshop specifically required or requested that participants send copies of their submissions to you in addition to submitting them to the Davidson review. Can you give us an idea about the volume of the submissions and how many of those might have come from Sydney?" Cr Clausen said.
"Having now considered the findings of the Davidson review, do you wish to comment on the appropriateness of that, given that it appears that a group of people had conspiratorial views, frankly, about the administration of council, that conspiracy theorists largely, based on the advice that we've been provided and how many of those claims were rebuked, worked together to create submissions believing some malfeasance in council, do you want to provide some comment on that?"
Our Newcastle is a grassroots group that was formally formed after the 2024 City of Newcastle local government elections and supported Cr Kerridge in his campaign.
The full 36-page review report was released late last week.
Cr Kerridge said he did not attend the help session on January 23 and was not involved in its organisation.
"I wasn't there, but certainly I know the Our Newcastle group offered to help people put in submissions," he said.
"Some of the people putting in submissions were not particularly technologically literate and just wanted assistance in doing that.
"I don't think there was anything illegitimate about the submissions."
An email written under the Our Newcastle letterhead invited recipients to drop in if they would like help with their submission or to chat through their ideas.
The letter requested recipients tell Our Newcastle when they had made a submission.
"No need to share any details - we're just trying to keep track of how many submissions are going in where we can," the letter said.
"This is a real chance to help shape how our council works - they're looking at everything from general governance to major projects."
Council papers revealed that the majority of more than 800 submissions to the review, some 70 per cent, were made from suburbs in Sydney.
That 70 per cent figure did not appear in the Davidson report.
Despite having access to a figure that was not made public in the report, the council and Davidson have repeatedly failed to answer questions from the Newcastle Herald about it.
Just this week, the Herald sent follow-up questions to the council asking how it got access to the 70 per cent figure, why it felt it was important to highlight it in a report to councillors, what steps, if any, the council took to verify the information and whether it is the result of an IP address issue or submitters entered Sydney postcodes.
Questions about key themes present in the Sydney-based submissions also went unanswered.
Instead, a City of Newcastle spokeswoman said the council placed no restriction on the identity or location of any person wishing to make a submission.
"Davidson has previously stated that when individuals made multiple submissions, it did not occur excessively," she said.
"Those that did make multiple submissions made additional submissions on multiple (separate) topics."
Of the 800 submissions received, 548 were made by individuals.
LORD mayor Ross Kerridge found himself in the hot seat at this week's council meeting over a session his campaign supporters held to help Novocastrians make submissions to an independent probe into the City of Newcastle.
More than 840 submissions were made to the Davidson Business Advisory review into the council's policies, processes and procedures.
Labor Cr Declan Clausen peppered independent Cr Kerridge with questions about the "appropriateness" of the Our Newcastle submission-writing session held by a group of people he described as having "conspiratorial views" about the administration of the council.
"That workshop specifically required or requested that participants send copies of their submissions to you in addition to submitting them to the Davidson review. Can you give us an idea about the volume of the submissions and how many of those might have come from Sydney?" Cr Clausen said.
"Having now considered the findings of the Davidson review, do you wish to comment on the appropriateness of that, given that it appears that a group of people had conspiratorial views, frankly, about the administration of council, that conspiracy theorists largely, based on the advice that we've been provided and how many of those claims were rebuked, worked together to create submissions believing some malfeasance in council, do you want to provide some comment on that?"
Our Newcastle is a grassroots group that was formally formed after the 2024 City of Newcastle local government elections and supported Cr Kerridge in his campaign.
The full 36-page review report was released late last week.
Cr Kerridge said he did not attend the help session on January 23 and was not involved in its organisation.
"I wasn't there, but certainly I know the Our Newcastle group offered to help people put in submissions," he said.
"Some of the people putting in submissions were not particularly technologically literate and just wanted assistance in doing that.
"I don't think there was anything illegitimate about the submissions."
An email written under the Our Newcastle letterhead invited recipients to drop in if they would like help with their submission or to chat through their ideas.
The letter requested recipients tell Our Newcastle when they had made a submission.
"No need to share any details - we're just trying to keep track of how many submissions are going in where we can," the letter said.
"This is a real chance to help shape how our council works - they're looking at everything from general governance to major projects."
Council papers revealed that the majority of more than 800 submissions to the review, some 70 per cent, were made from suburbs in Sydney.
That 70 per cent figure did not appear in the Davidson report.
Despite having access to a figure that was not made public in the report, the council and Davidson have repeatedly failed to answer questions from the Newcastle Herald about it.
Just this week, the Herald sent follow-up questions to the council asking how it got access to the 70 per cent figure, why it felt it was important to highlight it in a report to councillors, what steps, if any, the council took to verify the information and whether it is the result of an IP address issue or submitters entered Sydney postcodes.
Questions about key themes present in the Sydney-based submissions also went unanswered.
Instead, a City of Newcastle spokeswoman said the council placed no restriction on the identity or location of any person wishing to make a submission.
"Davidson has previously stated that when individuals made multiple submissions, it did not occur excessively," she said.
"Those that did make multiple submissions made additional submissions on multiple (separate) topics."
Of the 800 submissions received, 548 were made by individuals.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Advertiser
2 hours ago
- The Advertiser
'Deeply disrespectful': Kerridge supporters hit back at Clausen 'conspiratorial' claims
ROSS Kerridge's supporters have hit back at Declan Clausen after the Labor councillor publicly questioned the "appropriateness" of a submission-writing help session the lord mayor's Our Newcastle team held during an independent council inquiry. Our Newcastle, a grassroots group formally formed during the 2024 Newcastle council government elections, supported Cr Kerridge in his successful campaign for lord mayor. At last week's council meeting, Cr Clausen described those involved in the help session as having "conspiratorial views", believing "some malfeasance" in the Newcastle council. Our Newcastle has refuted the claims, saying it held the January 23 session to support community members, particularly those who were older and needed technical assistance to prepare and lodge submissions to the Davidson Business Advisory review. "We are disappointed by recent comments made by Cr Declan Clausen, who questioned the 'appropriateness' of our sessions and described those involved as holding 'conspiratorial views'," Our Newcastle president Leisha Parkinson said in a statement. "Those remarks are not only unfounded but deeply disrespectful to the many older residents who simply sought help navigating an online process in order to express their views, something they have every right to do. "Increasingly, we are seeing a pattern in Newcastle politics where those who hold views different to the Labor councillors are dismissed as 'conspiratorial' or accused of spreading 'misinformation'." The statement went on to say that Labor councillors are "not the sole arbitrators of truth in our city". Ms Parkinson stood for a position on Newcastle council in Ward 2 on the Our Newcastle independent ticket. More than 840 submissions were made to the Davidson review into the council's policies, processes and procedures. Almost 30 submissions were made about a perceived lack of respect among councillors, including towards the lord mayor. Cr Clausen said on Tuesday that Our Newcastle had misrepresented his position and the nature of his remarks. "I did raise concerns during the council meeting about the secret Our Newcastle letter-writing sessions," he said. "It is entirely appropriate to question whether a secretive political group holding private letter-writing sessions tried to unduly influence the outcome of the Davidson review." Cr Clausen said that if Labor, the Liberal Party or the Greens organised similar sessions, he suspected there would be "loud public outcries" condemning the action and said Our Newcastle should be held to the same standard. He went on to say the level of "unsolicited coaching" in the submission-writing session remains unanswered. The Newcastle Herald is aware of only one help session being held on January 23. Ms Parkinson maintains the session was open to all and "strictly non-partisan". "At no point did we influence or advise participants on what to write, nor did we question the content of their submissions," she said. "Our sole aim was to ensure that everyone in Newcastle had the opportunity to contribute freely and independently, without barriers due to technology or access." Cr Clausen said he fully supported community engagement, including providing help to those who needed it to ensure their views were considered. "The issue in this case was not whether the public should be supported, it was whether a single party-political group with strong pre-existing views should be positioning themselves as a neutral provider of that support," he said. Cr Kerridge has denied attending the help session and has said he was not involved in its organisation. An email written under the Our Newcastle letterhead invited recipients to drop in if they would like help with their submission or to chat through their ideas. The letter requested recipients to tell Our Newcastle when they had made a submission. Ms Parkinson said Our Newcastle believed support should have been provided by the council to make submissions, particularly for those with limited technological literacy. "Ensuring members of our community can participate in local democracy is a basic responsibility of good governance," she said. Ms Parkinson went on to accuse Labor councillors of a "broader pattern of ageism" including "repeated derogatory references to the lord mayor's age". "These are not only inappropriate but appear intended to dismiss and silence the voices of older residents," she said. "We believe that every person-young or old, deserves a place in our political conversation." The Newcastle Herald asked for clarification about comments Our Newcastle claims Labor councillors have made about the lord mayor's age. In response, Ms Parkinson referred to a comment made by Cr Clausen on one of his Facebook posts 39 weeks ago that said, "For too long, local government in NSW has been 'male, pale and stale'". Cr Clausen said he did not believe he had ever made a comment about the lord mayor's age, derogatory or otherwise. "The lord mayor has never raised any such concern with me," he said. "I also raise the irony of this line of criticism from Our Newcastle." Cr Clausen said both the lord mayor and the Herald's Facebook pages continue to include comments by members of the public describing him as a "boy" and "kid". "I am the longest-serving councillor in our chamber, having served on council for over a decade, and for seven consecutive years as the deputy lord mayor," he said. "Newly-elected councillors, regardless of their age, could benefit from listening to others with more experience." ROSS Kerridge's supporters have hit back at Declan Clausen after the Labor councillor publicly questioned the "appropriateness" of a submission-writing help session the lord mayor's Our Newcastle team held during an independent council inquiry. Our Newcastle, a grassroots group formally formed during the 2024 Newcastle council government elections, supported Cr Kerridge in his successful campaign for lord mayor. At last week's council meeting, Cr Clausen described those involved in the help session as having "conspiratorial views", believing "some malfeasance" in the Newcastle council. Our Newcastle has refuted the claims, saying it held the January 23 session to support community members, particularly those who were older and needed technical assistance to prepare and lodge submissions to the Davidson Business Advisory review. "We are disappointed by recent comments made by Cr Declan Clausen, who questioned the 'appropriateness' of our sessions and described those involved as holding 'conspiratorial views'," Our Newcastle president Leisha Parkinson said in a statement. "Those remarks are not only unfounded but deeply disrespectful to the many older residents who simply sought help navigating an online process in order to express their views, something they have every right to do. "Increasingly, we are seeing a pattern in Newcastle politics where those who hold views different to the Labor councillors are dismissed as 'conspiratorial' or accused of spreading 'misinformation'." The statement went on to say that Labor councillors are "not the sole arbitrators of truth in our city". Ms Parkinson stood for a position on Newcastle council in Ward 2 on the Our Newcastle independent ticket. More than 840 submissions were made to the Davidson review into the council's policies, processes and procedures. Almost 30 submissions were made about a perceived lack of respect among councillors, including towards the lord mayor. Cr Clausen said on Tuesday that Our Newcastle had misrepresented his position and the nature of his remarks. "I did raise concerns during the council meeting about the secret Our Newcastle letter-writing sessions," he said. "It is entirely appropriate to question whether a secretive political group holding private letter-writing sessions tried to unduly influence the outcome of the Davidson review." Cr Clausen said that if Labor, the Liberal Party or the Greens organised similar sessions, he suspected there would be "loud public outcries" condemning the action and said Our Newcastle should be held to the same standard. He went on to say the level of "unsolicited coaching" in the submission-writing session remains unanswered. The Newcastle Herald is aware of only one help session being held on January 23. Ms Parkinson maintains the session was open to all and "strictly non-partisan". "At no point did we influence or advise participants on what to write, nor did we question the content of their submissions," she said. "Our sole aim was to ensure that everyone in Newcastle had the opportunity to contribute freely and independently, without barriers due to technology or access." Cr Clausen said he fully supported community engagement, including providing help to those who needed it to ensure their views were considered. "The issue in this case was not whether the public should be supported, it was whether a single party-political group with strong pre-existing views should be positioning themselves as a neutral provider of that support," he said. Cr Kerridge has denied attending the help session and has said he was not involved in its organisation. An email written under the Our Newcastle letterhead invited recipients to drop in if they would like help with their submission or to chat through their ideas. The letter requested recipients to tell Our Newcastle when they had made a submission. Ms Parkinson said Our Newcastle believed support should have been provided by the council to make submissions, particularly for those with limited technological literacy. "Ensuring members of our community can participate in local democracy is a basic responsibility of good governance," she said. Ms Parkinson went on to accuse Labor councillors of a "broader pattern of ageism" including "repeated derogatory references to the lord mayor's age". "These are not only inappropriate but appear intended to dismiss and silence the voices of older residents," she said. "We believe that every person-young or old, deserves a place in our political conversation." The Newcastle Herald asked for clarification about comments Our Newcastle claims Labor councillors have made about the lord mayor's age. In response, Ms Parkinson referred to a comment made by Cr Clausen on one of his Facebook posts 39 weeks ago that said, "For too long, local government in NSW has been 'male, pale and stale'". Cr Clausen said he did not believe he had ever made a comment about the lord mayor's age, derogatory or otherwise. "The lord mayor has never raised any such concern with me," he said. "I also raise the irony of this line of criticism from Our Newcastle." Cr Clausen said both the lord mayor and the Herald's Facebook pages continue to include comments by members of the public describing him as a "boy" and "kid". "I am the longest-serving councillor in our chamber, having served on council for over a decade, and for seven consecutive years as the deputy lord mayor," he said. "Newly-elected councillors, regardless of their age, could benefit from listening to others with more experience." ROSS Kerridge's supporters have hit back at Declan Clausen after the Labor councillor publicly questioned the "appropriateness" of a submission-writing help session the lord mayor's Our Newcastle team held during an independent council inquiry. Our Newcastle, a grassroots group formally formed during the 2024 Newcastle council government elections, supported Cr Kerridge in his successful campaign for lord mayor. At last week's council meeting, Cr Clausen described those involved in the help session as having "conspiratorial views", believing "some malfeasance" in the Newcastle council. Our Newcastle has refuted the claims, saying it held the January 23 session to support community members, particularly those who were older and needed technical assistance to prepare and lodge submissions to the Davidson Business Advisory review. "We are disappointed by recent comments made by Cr Declan Clausen, who questioned the 'appropriateness' of our sessions and described those involved as holding 'conspiratorial views'," Our Newcastle president Leisha Parkinson said in a statement. "Those remarks are not only unfounded but deeply disrespectful to the many older residents who simply sought help navigating an online process in order to express their views, something they have every right to do. "Increasingly, we are seeing a pattern in Newcastle politics where those who hold views different to the Labor councillors are dismissed as 'conspiratorial' or accused of spreading 'misinformation'." The statement went on to say that Labor councillors are "not the sole arbitrators of truth in our city". Ms Parkinson stood for a position on Newcastle council in Ward 2 on the Our Newcastle independent ticket. More than 840 submissions were made to the Davidson review into the council's policies, processes and procedures. Almost 30 submissions were made about a perceived lack of respect among councillors, including towards the lord mayor. Cr Clausen said on Tuesday that Our Newcastle had misrepresented his position and the nature of his remarks. "I did raise concerns during the council meeting about the secret Our Newcastle letter-writing sessions," he said. "It is entirely appropriate to question whether a secretive political group holding private letter-writing sessions tried to unduly influence the outcome of the Davidson review." Cr Clausen said that if Labor, the Liberal Party or the Greens organised similar sessions, he suspected there would be "loud public outcries" condemning the action and said Our Newcastle should be held to the same standard. He went on to say the level of "unsolicited coaching" in the submission-writing session remains unanswered. The Newcastle Herald is aware of only one help session being held on January 23. Ms Parkinson maintains the session was open to all and "strictly non-partisan". "At no point did we influence or advise participants on what to write, nor did we question the content of their submissions," she said. "Our sole aim was to ensure that everyone in Newcastle had the opportunity to contribute freely and independently, without barriers due to technology or access." Cr Clausen said he fully supported community engagement, including providing help to those who needed it to ensure their views were considered. "The issue in this case was not whether the public should be supported, it was whether a single party-political group with strong pre-existing views should be positioning themselves as a neutral provider of that support," he said. Cr Kerridge has denied attending the help session and has said he was not involved in its organisation. An email written under the Our Newcastle letterhead invited recipients to drop in if they would like help with their submission or to chat through their ideas. The letter requested recipients to tell Our Newcastle when they had made a submission. Ms Parkinson said Our Newcastle believed support should have been provided by the council to make submissions, particularly for those with limited technological literacy. "Ensuring members of our community can participate in local democracy is a basic responsibility of good governance," she said. Ms Parkinson went on to accuse Labor councillors of a "broader pattern of ageism" including "repeated derogatory references to the lord mayor's age". "These are not only inappropriate but appear intended to dismiss and silence the voices of older residents," she said. "We believe that every person-young or old, deserves a place in our political conversation." The Newcastle Herald asked for clarification about comments Our Newcastle claims Labor councillors have made about the lord mayor's age. In response, Ms Parkinson referred to a comment made by Cr Clausen on one of his Facebook posts 39 weeks ago that said, "For too long, local government in NSW has been 'male, pale and stale'". Cr Clausen said he did not believe he had ever made a comment about the lord mayor's age, derogatory or otherwise. "The lord mayor has never raised any such concern with me," he said. "I also raise the irony of this line of criticism from Our Newcastle." Cr Clausen said both the lord mayor and the Herald's Facebook pages continue to include comments by members of the public describing him as a "boy" and "kid". "I am the longest-serving councillor in our chamber, having served on council for over a decade, and for seven consecutive years as the deputy lord mayor," he said. "Newly-elected councillors, regardless of their age, could benefit from listening to others with more experience." ROSS Kerridge's supporters have hit back at Declan Clausen after the Labor councillor publicly questioned the "appropriateness" of a submission-writing help session the lord mayor's Our Newcastle team held during an independent council inquiry. Our Newcastle, a grassroots group formally formed during the 2024 Newcastle council government elections, supported Cr Kerridge in his successful campaign for lord mayor. At last week's council meeting, Cr Clausen described those involved in the help session as having "conspiratorial views", believing "some malfeasance" in the Newcastle council. Our Newcastle has refuted the claims, saying it held the January 23 session to support community members, particularly those who were older and needed technical assistance to prepare and lodge submissions to the Davidson Business Advisory review. "We are disappointed by recent comments made by Cr Declan Clausen, who questioned the 'appropriateness' of our sessions and described those involved as holding 'conspiratorial views'," Our Newcastle president Leisha Parkinson said in a statement. "Those remarks are not only unfounded but deeply disrespectful to the many older residents who simply sought help navigating an online process in order to express their views, something they have every right to do. "Increasingly, we are seeing a pattern in Newcastle politics where those who hold views different to the Labor councillors are dismissed as 'conspiratorial' or accused of spreading 'misinformation'." The statement went on to say that Labor councillors are "not the sole arbitrators of truth in our city". Ms Parkinson stood for a position on Newcastle council in Ward 2 on the Our Newcastle independent ticket. More than 840 submissions were made to the Davidson review into the council's policies, processes and procedures. Almost 30 submissions were made about a perceived lack of respect among councillors, including towards the lord mayor. Cr Clausen said on Tuesday that Our Newcastle had misrepresented his position and the nature of his remarks. "I did raise concerns during the council meeting about the secret Our Newcastle letter-writing sessions," he said. "It is entirely appropriate to question whether a secretive political group holding private letter-writing sessions tried to unduly influence the outcome of the Davidson review." Cr Clausen said that if Labor, the Liberal Party or the Greens organised similar sessions, he suspected there would be "loud public outcries" condemning the action and said Our Newcastle should be held to the same standard. He went on to say the level of "unsolicited coaching" in the submission-writing session remains unanswered. The Newcastle Herald is aware of only one help session being held on January 23. Ms Parkinson maintains the session was open to all and "strictly non-partisan". "At no point did we influence or advise participants on what to write, nor did we question the content of their submissions," she said. "Our sole aim was to ensure that everyone in Newcastle had the opportunity to contribute freely and independently, without barriers due to technology or access." Cr Clausen said he fully supported community engagement, including providing help to those who needed it to ensure their views were considered. "The issue in this case was not whether the public should be supported, it was whether a single party-political group with strong pre-existing views should be positioning themselves as a neutral provider of that support," he said. Cr Kerridge has denied attending the help session and has said he was not involved in its organisation. An email written under the Our Newcastle letterhead invited recipients to drop in if they would like help with their submission or to chat through their ideas. The letter requested recipients to tell Our Newcastle when they had made a submission. Ms Parkinson said Our Newcastle believed support should have been provided by the council to make submissions, particularly for those with limited technological literacy. "Ensuring members of our community can participate in local democracy is a basic responsibility of good governance," she said. Ms Parkinson went on to accuse Labor councillors of a "broader pattern of ageism" including "repeated derogatory references to the lord mayor's age". "These are not only inappropriate but appear intended to dismiss and silence the voices of older residents," she said. "We believe that every person-young or old, deserves a place in our political conversation." The Newcastle Herald asked for clarification about comments Our Newcastle claims Labor councillors have made about the lord mayor's age. In response, Ms Parkinson referred to a comment made by Cr Clausen on one of his Facebook posts 39 weeks ago that said, "For too long, local government in NSW has been 'male, pale and stale'". Cr Clausen said he did not believe he had ever made a comment about the lord mayor's age, derogatory or otherwise. "The lord mayor has never raised any such concern with me," he said. "I also raise the irony of this line of criticism from Our Newcastle." Cr Clausen said both the lord mayor and the Herald's Facebook pages continue to include comments by members of the public describing him as a "boy" and "kid". "I am the longest-serving councillor in our chamber, having served on council for over a decade, and for seven consecutive years as the deputy lord mayor," he said. "Newly-elected councillors, regardless of their age, could benefit from listening to others with more experience."
The Advertiser
4 days ago
- The Advertiser
Clausen questions lord mayor over 'help session' for independent probe submissions
LORD mayor Ross Kerridge found himself in the hot seat at this week's council meeting over a session his campaign supporters held to help Novocastrians make submissions to an independent probe into the City of Newcastle. More than 840 submissions were made to the Davidson Business Advisory review into the council's policies, processes and procedures. Labor Cr Declan Clausen peppered independent Cr Kerridge with questions about the "appropriateness" of the Our Newcastle submission-writing session held by a group of people he described as having "conspiratorial views" about the administration of the council. "That workshop specifically required or requested that participants send copies of their submissions to you in addition to submitting them to the Davidson review. Can you give us an idea about the volume of the submissions and how many of those might have come from Sydney?" Cr Clausen said. "Having now considered the findings of the Davidson review, do you wish to comment on the appropriateness of that, given that it appears that a group of people had conspiratorial views, frankly, about the administration of council, that conspiracy theorists largely, based on the advice that we've been provided and how many of those claims were rebuked, worked together to create submissions believing some malfeasance in council, do you want to provide some comment on that?" Our Newcastle is a grassroots group that was formally formed after the 2024 City of Newcastle local government elections and supported Cr Kerridge in his campaign. The full 36-page review report was released late last week. Cr Kerridge said he did not attend the help session on January 23 and was not involved in its organisation. "I wasn't there, but certainly I know the Our Newcastle group offered to help people put in submissions," he said. "Some of the people putting in submissions were not particularly technologically literate and just wanted assistance in doing that. "I don't think there was anything illegitimate about the submissions." An email written under the Our Newcastle letterhead invited recipients to drop in if they would like help with their submission or to chat through their ideas. The letter requested recipients tell Our Newcastle when they had made a submission. "No need to share any details - we're just trying to keep track of how many submissions are going in where we can," the letter said. "This is a real chance to help shape how our council works - they're looking at everything from general governance to major projects." Council papers revealed that the majority of more than 800 submissions to the review, some 70 per cent, were made from suburbs in Sydney. That 70 per cent figure did not appear in the Davidson report. Despite having access to a figure that was not made public in the report, the council and Davidson have repeatedly failed to answer questions from the Newcastle Herald about it. Just this week, the Herald sent follow-up questions to the council asking how it got access to the 70 per cent figure, why it felt it was important to highlight it in a report to councillors, what steps, if any, the council took to verify the information and whether it is the result of an IP address issue or submitters entered Sydney postcodes. Questions about key themes present in the Sydney-based submissions also went unanswered. Instead, a City of Newcastle spokeswoman said the council placed no restriction on the identity or location of any person wishing to make a submission. "Davidson has previously stated that when individuals made multiple submissions, it did not occur excessively," she said. "Those that did make multiple submissions made additional submissions on multiple (separate) topics." Of the 800 submissions received, 548 were made by individuals. LORD mayor Ross Kerridge found himself in the hot seat at this week's council meeting over a session his campaign supporters held to help Novocastrians make submissions to an independent probe into the City of Newcastle. More than 840 submissions were made to the Davidson Business Advisory review into the council's policies, processes and procedures. Labor Cr Declan Clausen peppered independent Cr Kerridge with questions about the "appropriateness" of the Our Newcastle submission-writing session held by a group of people he described as having "conspiratorial views" about the administration of the council. "That workshop specifically required or requested that participants send copies of their submissions to you in addition to submitting them to the Davidson review. Can you give us an idea about the volume of the submissions and how many of those might have come from Sydney?" Cr Clausen said. "Having now considered the findings of the Davidson review, do you wish to comment on the appropriateness of that, given that it appears that a group of people had conspiratorial views, frankly, about the administration of council, that conspiracy theorists largely, based on the advice that we've been provided and how many of those claims were rebuked, worked together to create submissions believing some malfeasance in council, do you want to provide some comment on that?" Our Newcastle is a grassroots group that was formally formed after the 2024 City of Newcastle local government elections and supported Cr Kerridge in his campaign. The full 36-page review report was released late last week. Cr Kerridge said he did not attend the help session on January 23 and was not involved in its organisation. "I wasn't there, but certainly I know the Our Newcastle group offered to help people put in submissions," he said. "Some of the people putting in submissions were not particularly technologically literate and just wanted assistance in doing that. "I don't think there was anything illegitimate about the submissions." An email written under the Our Newcastle letterhead invited recipients to drop in if they would like help with their submission or to chat through their ideas. The letter requested recipients tell Our Newcastle when they had made a submission. "No need to share any details - we're just trying to keep track of how many submissions are going in where we can," the letter said. "This is a real chance to help shape how our council works - they're looking at everything from general governance to major projects." Council papers revealed that the majority of more than 800 submissions to the review, some 70 per cent, were made from suburbs in Sydney. That 70 per cent figure did not appear in the Davidson report. Despite having access to a figure that was not made public in the report, the council and Davidson have repeatedly failed to answer questions from the Newcastle Herald about it. Just this week, the Herald sent follow-up questions to the council asking how it got access to the 70 per cent figure, why it felt it was important to highlight it in a report to councillors, what steps, if any, the council took to verify the information and whether it is the result of an IP address issue or submitters entered Sydney postcodes. Questions about key themes present in the Sydney-based submissions also went unanswered. Instead, a City of Newcastle spokeswoman said the council placed no restriction on the identity or location of any person wishing to make a submission. "Davidson has previously stated that when individuals made multiple submissions, it did not occur excessively," she said. "Those that did make multiple submissions made additional submissions on multiple (separate) topics." Of the 800 submissions received, 548 were made by individuals. LORD mayor Ross Kerridge found himself in the hot seat at this week's council meeting over a session his campaign supporters held to help Novocastrians make submissions to an independent probe into the City of Newcastle. More than 840 submissions were made to the Davidson Business Advisory review into the council's policies, processes and procedures. Labor Cr Declan Clausen peppered independent Cr Kerridge with questions about the "appropriateness" of the Our Newcastle submission-writing session held by a group of people he described as having "conspiratorial views" about the administration of the council. "That workshop specifically required or requested that participants send copies of their submissions to you in addition to submitting them to the Davidson review. Can you give us an idea about the volume of the submissions and how many of those might have come from Sydney?" Cr Clausen said. "Having now considered the findings of the Davidson review, do you wish to comment on the appropriateness of that, given that it appears that a group of people had conspiratorial views, frankly, about the administration of council, that conspiracy theorists largely, based on the advice that we've been provided and how many of those claims were rebuked, worked together to create submissions believing some malfeasance in council, do you want to provide some comment on that?" Our Newcastle is a grassroots group that was formally formed after the 2024 City of Newcastle local government elections and supported Cr Kerridge in his campaign. The full 36-page review report was released late last week. Cr Kerridge said he did not attend the help session on January 23 and was not involved in its organisation. "I wasn't there, but certainly I know the Our Newcastle group offered to help people put in submissions," he said. "Some of the people putting in submissions were not particularly technologically literate and just wanted assistance in doing that. "I don't think there was anything illegitimate about the submissions." An email written under the Our Newcastle letterhead invited recipients to drop in if they would like help with their submission or to chat through their ideas. The letter requested recipients tell Our Newcastle when they had made a submission. "No need to share any details - we're just trying to keep track of how many submissions are going in where we can," the letter said. "This is a real chance to help shape how our council works - they're looking at everything from general governance to major projects." Council papers revealed that the majority of more than 800 submissions to the review, some 70 per cent, were made from suburbs in Sydney. That 70 per cent figure did not appear in the Davidson report. Despite having access to a figure that was not made public in the report, the council and Davidson have repeatedly failed to answer questions from the Newcastle Herald about it. Just this week, the Herald sent follow-up questions to the council asking how it got access to the 70 per cent figure, why it felt it was important to highlight it in a report to councillors, what steps, if any, the council took to verify the information and whether it is the result of an IP address issue or submitters entered Sydney postcodes. Questions about key themes present in the Sydney-based submissions also went unanswered. Instead, a City of Newcastle spokeswoman said the council placed no restriction on the identity or location of any person wishing to make a submission. "Davidson has previously stated that when individuals made multiple submissions, it did not occur excessively," she said. "Those that did make multiple submissions made additional submissions on multiple (separate) topics." Of the 800 submissions received, 548 were made by individuals. LORD mayor Ross Kerridge found himself in the hot seat at this week's council meeting over a session his campaign supporters held to help Novocastrians make submissions to an independent probe into the City of Newcastle. More than 840 submissions were made to the Davidson Business Advisory review into the council's policies, processes and procedures. Labor Cr Declan Clausen peppered independent Cr Kerridge with questions about the "appropriateness" of the Our Newcastle submission-writing session held by a group of people he described as having "conspiratorial views" about the administration of the council. "That workshop specifically required or requested that participants send copies of their submissions to you in addition to submitting them to the Davidson review. Can you give us an idea about the volume of the submissions and how many of those might have come from Sydney?" Cr Clausen said. "Having now considered the findings of the Davidson review, do you wish to comment on the appropriateness of that, given that it appears that a group of people had conspiratorial views, frankly, about the administration of council, that conspiracy theorists largely, based on the advice that we've been provided and how many of those claims were rebuked, worked together to create submissions believing some malfeasance in council, do you want to provide some comment on that?" Our Newcastle is a grassroots group that was formally formed after the 2024 City of Newcastle local government elections and supported Cr Kerridge in his campaign. The full 36-page review report was released late last week. Cr Kerridge said he did not attend the help session on January 23 and was not involved in its organisation. "I wasn't there, but certainly I know the Our Newcastle group offered to help people put in submissions," he said. "Some of the people putting in submissions were not particularly technologically literate and just wanted assistance in doing that. "I don't think there was anything illegitimate about the submissions." An email written under the Our Newcastle letterhead invited recipients to drop in if they would like help with their submission or to chat through their ideas. The letter requested recipients tell Our Newcastle when they had made a submission. "No need to share any details - we're just trying to keep track of how many submissions are going in where we can," the letter said. "This is a real chance to help shape how our council works - they're looking at everything from general governance to major projects." Council papers revealed that the majority of more than 800 submissions to the review, some 70 per cent, were made from suburbs in Sydney. That 70 per cent figure did not appear in the Davidson report. Despite having access to a figure that was not made public in the report, the council and Davidson have repeatedly failed to answer questions from the Newcastle Herald about it. Just this week, the Herald sent follow-up questions to the council asking how it got access to the 70 per cent figure, why it felt it was important to highlight it in a report to councillors, what steps, if any, the council took to verify the information and whether it is the result of an IP address issue or submitters entered Sydney postcodes. Questions about key themes present in the Sydney-based submissions also went unanswered. Instead, a City of Newcastle spokeswoman said the council placed no restriction on the identity or location of any person wishing to make a submission. "Davidson has previously stated that when individuals made multiple submissions, it did not occur excessively," she said. "Those that did make multiple submissions made additional submissions on multiple (separate) topics." Of the 800 submissions received, 548 were made by individuals.
The Advertiser
26-05-2025
- The Advertiser
'Respect': community calls out behaviour at Newcastle council meetings
CONCERNS about councillor behaviour, respect and the effectiveness of council meetings have been thrust into the spotlight with the release of a report into City of Newcastle's policies, processes and procedures. A perceived lack of respect among councillors, including towards independent lord mayor Ross Kerridge, was one of the key issues raised in 29 submissions to the Davidson Business Advisory review. While that specific issue represented just under four per cent of some 800 submissions to the review, more than 270 submissions centred around general governance, and Davidson set aside significant space in its report to address community concerns. Davidson's Justin Hanney told a public briefing earlier this month that the firm only expected to receive between 25 and 50 submissions total based on similar reviews elsewhere. The review report, released late on Thursday, said that while council meetings naturally involved political debate, some submissions expressed concern that the debate was "hindering constructive discussion and decision-making". "Despite the political diversity within the council, decision-making processes have not been significantly affected, although community feedback raised concerns regarding the transparency of voting practices during meetings," the report said. Members of the public raised a number of issues, with a strong focus on council meetings, correspondence with the media, transparency in decision-making and Government Information Public Access (GIPA) processes. The community called for more clarity on how and why council decisions are made. Concerns were also raised about poor access to councillors to raise issues or discuss decisions made by the elected council. A central finding of the report was the importance of a "strong, collaborative" relationship between the lord mayor, councillors and chief executive Jeremy Bath, which Davidson said was "critical" to the success of the council. "There understandably may be some differences in views between the councillors, including the lord mayor, just as the community they represent may hold differing views," the report said. "However, once the council has decided a direction, the chief executive officer is accountable to ensure that this agreed position is effectively implemented by the public service." There have been ongoing tensions between Mr Bath and the lord mayor since Cr Kerridge defeated former lord mayor Nuatali Nelmes in the September election, culminating in Cr Kerridge publicly alleging bullying by council staff. He later retracted and apologised for the comments. A number of areas of improvement were identified in the Davidson review aimed at getting the lord mayor, councillors and Mr Bath on the same page about strategic priorities, which the review said would be "essential" for cohesive decision-making and leadership. "Strengthening this relationship will support improved collaboration between the lord mayor, CEO and executive team and councillors, creating a more unified leadership environment," the report said. The review found the council's executive team had faced "some challenges" in effectively and quickly aligning the organisation with the priorities of the newly elected council, which it said had resulted in some operational difficulties. Davidson said there were indications of a need for "smoother coordination" between the lord mayor, councillors and senior staff, which in turn impacted decision-making processes. "Some further challenges at this time result from the political process whereby the lord mayor must gain the majority support of councillors before the chief executive can be clearly directed on these established priorities," the report said. Concerns were also raised around meeting procedures, highlighting a need for "more structured discussions" and "clearer communication" about councillor voting decisions. While council decisions were made in line with the rules, the review found communication and transparency could be improved, along with better engagement to help locals understand council decisions. One suggestion was to have councillors identify if they are speaking for or against a motion for greater transparency. The review found that while the structure of meetings is "generally followed", there is an opportunity to sharpen their efficiency. "On several occasions, meetings have extended beyond six hours, continuing into the early hours of the morning," the report said. "While occasional longer sessions may be necessary, this area warrants attention to ensure that decisions are made in a timely and well-considered manner." The review gave council staff the tick of approval, pointing out their professionalism and effort in setting councillors up with the tools to get the job done. However, the report said meetings would benefit from greater structure, and said there is some uncertainty around Mr Bath's role at council meetings. As the head of the council, Mr Bath is responsible for bringing the council's vision to life, providing strategic advice to the lord mayor and councillors and ensuring decisions are made within regulations. The report recommended the council stick more closely to meeting procedures, scheduling and governance and in particular, speaking time limits. CONCERNS about councillor behaviour, respect and the effectiveness of council meetings have been thrust into the spotlight with the release of a report into City of Newcastle's policies, processes and procedures. A perceived lack of respect among councillors, including towards independent lord mayor Ross Kerridge, was one of the key issues raised in 29 submissions to the Davidson Business Advisory review. While that specific issue represented just under four per cent of some 800 submissions to the review, more than 270 submissions centred around general governance, and Davidson set aside significant space in its report to address community concerns. Davidson's Justin Hanney told a public briefing earlier this month that the firm only expected to receive between 25 and 50 submissions total based on similar reviews elsewhere. The review report, released late on Thursday, said that while council meetings naturally involved political debate, some submissions expressed concern that the debate was "hindering constructive discussion and decision-making". "Despite the political diversity within the council, decision-making processes have not been significantly affected, although community feedback raised concerns regarding the transparency of voting practices during meetings," the report said. Members of the public raised a number of issues, with a strong focus on council meetings, correspondence with the media, transparency in decision-making and Government Information Public Access (GIPA) processes. The community called for more clarity on how and why council decisions are made. Concerns were also raised about poor access to councillors to raise issues or discuss decisions made by the elected council. A central finding of the report was the importance of a "strong, collaborative" relationship between the lord mayor, councillors and chief executive Jeremy Bath, which Davidson said was "critical" to the success of the council. "There understandably may be some differences in views between the councillors, including the lord mayor, just as the community they represent may hold differing views," the report said. "However, once the council has decided a direction, the chief executive officer is accountable to ensure that this agreed position is effectively implemented by the public service." There have been ongoing tensions between Mr Bath and the lord mayor since Cr Kerridge defeated former lord mayor Nuatali Nelmes in the September election, culminating in Cr Kerridge publicly alleging bullying by council staff. He later retracted and apologised for the comments. A number of areas of improvement were identified in the Davidson review aimed at getting the lord mayor, councillors and Mr Bath on the same page about strategic priorities, which the review said would be "essential" for cohesive decision-making and leadership. "Strengthening this relationship will support improved collaboration between the lord mayor, CEO and executive team and councillors, creating a more unified leadership environment," the report said. The review found the council's executive team had faced "some challenges" in effectively and quickly aligning the organisation with the priorities of the newly elected council, which it said had resulted in some operational difficulties. Davidson said there were indications of a need for "smoother coordination" between the lord mayor, councillors and senior staff, which in turn impacted decision-making processes. "Some further challenges at this time result from the political process whereby the lord mayor must gain the majority support of councillors before the chief executive can be clearly directed on these established priorities," the report said. Concerns were also raised around meeting procedures, highlighting a need for "more structured discussions" and "clearer communication" about councillor voting decisions. While council decisions were made in line with the rules, the review found communication and transparency could be improved, along with better engagement to help locals understand council decisions. One suggestion was to have councillors identify if they are speaking for or against a motion for greater transparency. The review found that while the structure of meetings is "generally followed", there is an opportunity to sharpen their efficiency. "On several occasions, meetings have extended beyond six hours, continuing into the early hours of the morning," the report said. "While occasional longer sessions may be necessary, this area warrants attention to ensure that decisions are made in a timely and well-considered manner." The review gave council staff the tick of approval, pointing out their professionalism and effort in setting councillors up with the tools to get the job done. However, the report said meetings would benefit from greater structure, and said there is some uncertainty around Mr Bath's role at council meetings. As the head of the council, Mr Bath is responsible for bringing the council's vision to life, providing strategic advice to the lord mayor and councillors and ensuring decisions are made within regulations. The report recommended the council stick more closely to meeting procedures, scheduling and governance and in particular, speaking time limits. CONCERNS about councillor behaviour, respect and the effectiveness of council meetings have been thrust into the spotlight with the release of a report into City of Newcastle's policies, processes and procedures. A perceived lack of respect among councillors, including towards independent lord mayor Ross Kerridge, was one of the key issues raised in 29 submissions to the Davidson Business Advisory review. While that specific issue represented just under four per cent of some 800 submissions to the review, more than 270 submissions centred around general governance, and Davidson set aside significant space in its report to address community concerns. Davidson's Justin Hanney told a public briefing earlier this month that the firm only expected to receive between 25 and 50 submissions total based on similar reviews elsewhere. The review report, released late on Thursday, said that while council meetings naturally involved political debate, some submissions expressed concern that the debate was "hindering constructive discussion and decision-making". "Despite the political diversity within the council, decision-making processes have not been significantly affected, although community feedback raised concerns regarding the transparency of voting practices during meetings," the report said. Members of the public raised a number of issues, with a strong focus on council meetings, correspondence with the media, transparency in decision-making and Government Information Public Access (GIPA) processes. The community called for more clarity on how and why council decisions are made. Concerns were also raised about poor access to councillors to raise issues or discuss decisions made by the elected council. A central finding of the report was the importance of a "strong, collaborative" relationship between the lord mayor, councillors and chief executive Jeremy Bath, which Davidson said was "critical" to the success of the council. "There understandably may be some differences in views between the councillors, including the lord mayor, just as the community they represent may hold differing views," the report said. "However, once the council has decided a direction, the chief executive officer is accountable to ensure that this agreed position is effectively implemented by the public service." There have been ongoing tensions between Mr Bath and the lord mayor since Cr Kerridge defeated former lord mayor Nuatali Nelmes in the September election, culminating in Cr Kerridge publicly alleging bullying by council staff. He later retracted and apologised for the comments. A number of areas of improvement were identified in the Davidson review aimed at getting the lord mayor, councillors and Mr Bath on the same page about strategic priorities, which the review said would be "essential" for cohesive decision-making and leadership. "Strengthening this relationship will support improved collaboration between the lord mayor, CEO and executive team and councillors, creating a more unified leadership environment," the report said. The review found the council's executive team had faced "some challenges" in effectively and quickly aligning the organisation with the priorities of the newly elected council, which it said had resulted in some operational difficulties. Davidson said there were indications of a need for "smoother coordination" between the lord mayor, councillors and senior staff, which in turn impacted decision-making processes. "Some further challenges at this time result from the political process whereby the lord mayor must gain the majority support of councillors before the chief executive can be clearly directed on these established priorities," the report said. Concerns were also raised around meeting procedures, highlighting a need for "more structured discussions" and "clearer communication" about councillor voting decisions. While council decisions were made in line with the rules, the review found communication and transparency could be improved, along with better engagement to help locals understand council decisions. One suggestion was to have councillors identify if they are speaking for or against a motion for greater transparency. The review found that while the structure of meetings is "generally followed", there is an opportunity to sharpen their efficiency. "On several occasions, meetings have extended beyond six hours, continuing into the early hours of the morning," the report said. "While occasional longer sessions may be necessary, this area warrants attention to ensure that decisions are made in a timely and well-considered manner." The review gave council staff the tick of approval, pointing out their professionalism and effort in setting councillors up with the tools to get the job done. However, the report said meetings would benefit from greater structure, and said there is some uncertainty around Mr Bath's role at council meetings. As the head of the council, Mr Bath is responsible for bringing the council's vision to life, providing strategic advice to the lord mayor and councillors and ensuring decisions are made within regulations. The report recommended the council stick more closely to meeting procedures, scheduling and governance and in particular, speaking time limits. CONCERNS about councillor behaviour, respect and the effectiveness of council meetings have been thrust into the spotlight with the release of a report into City of Newcastle's policies, processes and procedures. A perceived lack of respect among councillors, including towards independent lord mayor Ross Kerridge, was one of the key issues raised in 29 submissions to the Davidson Business Advisory review. While that specific issue represented just under four per cent of some 800 submissions to the review, more than 270 submissions centred around general governance, and Davidson set aside significant space in its report to address community concerns. Davidson's Justin Hanney told a public briefing earlier this month that the firm only expected to receive between 25 and 50 submissions total based on similar reviews elsewhere. The review report, released late on Thursday, said that while council meetings naturally involved political debate, some submissions expressed concern that the debate was "hindering constructive discussion and decision-making". "Despite the political diversity within the council, decision-making processes have not been significantly affected, although community feedback raised concerns regarding the transparency of voting practices during meetings," the report said. Members of the public raised a number of issues, with a strong focus on council meetings, correspondence with the media, transparency in decision-making and Government Information Public Access (GIPA) processes. The community called for more clarity on how and why council decisions are made. Concerns were also raised about poor access to councillors to raise issues or discuss decisions made by the elected council. A central finding of the report was the importance of a "strong, collaborative" relationship between the lord mayor, councillors and chief executive Jeremy Bath, which Davidson said was "critical" to the success of the council. "There understandably may be some differences in views between the councillors, including the lord mayor, just as the community they represent may hold differing views," the report said. "However, once the council has decided a direction, the chief executive officer is accountable to ensure that this agreed position is effectively implemented by the public service." There have been ongoing tensions between Mr Bath and the lord mayor since Cr Kerridge defeated former lord mayor Nuatali Nelmes in the September election, culminating in Cr Kerridge publicly alleging bullying by council staff. He later retracted and apologised for the comments. A number of areas of improvement were identified in the Davidson review aimed at getting the lord mayor, councillors and Mr Bath on the same page about strategic priorities, which the review said would be "essential" for cohesive decision-making and leadership. "Strengthening this relationship will support improved collaboration between the lord mayor, CEO and executive team and councillors, creating a more unified leadership environment," the report said. The review found the council's executive team had faced "some challenges" in effectively and quickly aligning the organisation with the priorities of the newly elected council, which it said had resulted in some operational difficulties. Davidson said there were indications of a need for "smoother coordination" between the lord mayor, councillors and senior staff, which in turn impacted decision-making processes. "Some further challenges at this time result from the political process whereby the lord mayor must gain the majority support of councillors before the chief executive can be clearly directed on these established priorities," the report said. Concerns were also raised around meeting procedures, highlighting a need for "more structured discussions" and "clearer communication" about councillor voting decisions. While council decisions were made in line with the rules, the review found communication and transparency could be improved, along with better engagement to help locals understand council decisions. One suggestion was to have councillors identify if they are speaking for or against a motion for greater transparency. The review found that while the structure of meetings is "generally followed", there is an opportunity to sharpen their efficiency. "On several occasions, meetings have extended beyond six hours, continuing into the early hours of the morning," the report said. "While occasional longer sessions may be necessary, this area warrants attention to ensure that decisions are made in a timely and well-considered manner." The review gave council staff the tick of approval, pointing out their professionalism and effort in setting councillors up with the tools to get the job done. However, the report said meetings would benefit from greater structure, and said there is some uncertainty around Mr Bath's role at council meetings. As the head of the council, Mr Bath is responsible for bringing the council's vision to life, providing strategic advice to the lord mayor and councillors and ensuring decisions are made within regulations. The report recommended the council stick more closely to meeting procedures, scheduling and governance and in particular, speaking time limits.
