Council Governance Manager / Corporate Policeman Recommends and Implements Unlawful Agreement with a
Council Committee Member to Conceal Open Access Information Mandated for Release, 30.03.2012
Documents originating from Port Stephens Council show a chronology of events which makes a mockery of current freedom of information legislation, the Government Information (Public Access) Act 2009, or GIPA.
The document of today’s date shows a communication from Council’s Governance Manager / Corporate Policeman Tony Wickham to a member of the public who asked how he could submit an open access category document to Council without it being made public, in contravention and contradiction to the legislation.
Open access information is mandated for release free of charge; meaning there are no restrictions on it, unless there is an overriding public interest against disclosure. The key word here is overriding. There is a general expectation such would be legitimate.
The member of the public is confirmed to be on a number of Council Committees, so he has a professional relationship with Wickham at minimum.
In his personal response Mr Wickham suggests reliance on the Privacy & Personal Information Protection Act 1998 (PPIP) to hide the author’s name, and a section of the GIPA Act which states release of the information would expose a person to a risk of serious harm or harassment or serious intimidation. Extraordinary!
Of course, at the time of the “enquiry” no document existed so the suggestion on how to manage it was entirely inappropriate, unethical, unlawful, and unconscionable.
It’s also undoubtedly unethical to stage a formal decision under the Act by default. The realisation any person is able to make an agreement with this Council Executive is difficult to comprehend, and flies in the face of good governance. Wickham’s job as Governance Manager / Corporate Policeman is to be a role model and ensure corruption is stifled.
“If this is an example of what the public can expect from a public officer delegated to make statutory decisions with legal implications, then perhaps we should all expect anything Wickham does should be thoroughly scrutinised, bearing in mind he’s also the Code of Conduct Coordinator so any due report is likely to go absolutely nowhere,” stated Telina Webb recipient of the Council record.
“After what’s been happening with my husband’s and my Development Application with this Council, I probably shouldn’t be surprised to see evidence of secret handshakes and covert deals all connected to it,” stated Webb. “And we’re pretty sure who this special person is, he won’t be able to hide forever.”
Webb intends to lodge a separate access application for Wickham’s mandatory disclosures as he’s expected to be open about his professional relationships or connection to any Council business that could place him in a position of conflict of interest. The public will have to wait and see where this gentlemanly dalliance ends up. Contact: Tony Wickham: Tony.wickham@portstephens.nsw.gov.au
The document of today’s date shows a communication from Council’s Governance Manager / Corporate Policeman Tony Wickham to a member of the public who asked how he could submit an open access category document to Council without it being made public, in contravention and contradiction to the legislation.
Open access information is mandated for release free of charge; meaning there are no restrictions on it, unless there is an overriding public interest against disclosure. The key word here is overriding. There is a general expectation such would be legitimate.
The member of the public is confirmed to be on a number of Council Committees, so he has a professional relationship with Wickham at minimum.
In his personal response Mr Wickham suggests reliance on the Privacy & Personal Information Protection Act 1998 (PPIP) to hide the author’s name, and a section of the GIPA Act which states release of the information would expose a person to a risk of serious harm or harassment or serious intimidation. Extraordinary!
Of course, at the time of the “enquiry” no document existed so the suggestion on how to manage it was entirely inappropriate, unethical, unlawful, and unconscionable.
It’s also undoubtedly unethical to stage a formal decision under the Act by default. The realisation any person is able to make an agreement with this Council Executive is difficult to comprehend, and flies in the face of good governance. Wickham’s job as Governance Manager / Corporate Policeman is to be a role model and ensure corruption is stifled.
“If this is an example of what the public can expect from a public officer delegated to make statutory decisions with legal implications, then perhaps we should all expect anything Wickham does should be thoroughly scrutinised, bearing in mind he’s also the Code of Conduct Coordinator so any due report is likely to go absolutely nowhere,” stated Telina Webb recipient of the Council record.
“After what’s been happening with my husband’s and my Development Application with this Council, I probably shouldn’t be surprised to see evidence of secret handshakes and covert deals all connected to it,” stated Webb. “And we’re pretty sure who this special person is, he won’t be able to hide forever.”
Webb intends to lodge a separate access application for Wickham’s mandatory disclosures as he’s expected to be open about his professional relationships or connection to any Council business that could place him in a position of conflict of interest. The public will have to wait and see where this gentlemanly dalliance ends up. Contact: Tony Wickham: Tony.wickham@portstephens.nsw.gov.au