Shire of Capel councillors defer motion to change event attendance rules following “torturous” debate

The Shire of Capel will wait until this month’s meeting to decide on new rules outlining event attendance by councillors following a more than half-hour discussion during last week’s meeting. The lengthy debate caught many by surprise given the recommendation by council staff suggested only a minor change to the rules passed in 2020. It altered wording to allow the shire president and deputy shire president to attend WA Local Government Association annual general meetings and conferences without the council’s approval, while additional councillors could attend at the discretion of a council vote. The rules previously stated any attendance at WALGA meetings or conferences had to be approved by the council, even for the shire president and deputy president. Cr Christine Terrantroy was quick to move a multitude of amendments to the recommendation, including changing rules around pre-approved events, WALGA attendance, who gives approval for events and reimbursement of partners’ expenses. Part of her amendments would see either the shire president or deputy shire president attend the WALGA events rather than both automatically going along, with at least three council-appointed councillors allowed to attend. Cr Terrantroy said her changes centred on her belief councillors should have access to professional development. ”The reason I’ve done this is because I’ve always been an advocate for opportunities for councillors to do professional development and networking and I feel that if the president is attending a conference or a meeting, there’s no need for the deputy to attend as well,“ she said. “Especially if other councillors or all councillors would benefit from attending as well, that’s why I’ve opened it up.” The changes brought a wave of confusion, with both Cr John Fergusson and shire president Doug Kitchen questioning some of the alterations. Cr Fergusson moved a further amendment to Cr Terrantroy’s changes during the debate, with Cr Kieran Noonan also putting forward a failed motion to defer the discussion until the next meeting. Both Cr Noonan and Cr Fergusson’s motions were shot down and debate returned to Cr Terrantroy’s amendment. But a second motion later on in the debate to defer the decision by Cr Noonan was successful, passing 5-4. Cr Noonan said the motion should be deferred to give elected members time to understand the changes and end the “torturous” debate. “It’s bizarre and I certainly imagine that the staff and most councillors would not have anticipated this to become the most controversial of all of the motions that are going to come to us tonight,” he said. “The problem that we are having with (the motion) is because there are so many different amendments that have been proposed in the alternative motion and if we go back to the original motion, there are still all of those issues still there.”