A parliamentary question addresses the status of suspended City of Joondalup councillors, specifically regarding their terms, access to a report on an inquiry, and potential discrimination. The Minister's response clarifies the councillors' status and explains why some were invited to receive the report while others were not.

AnsweredQoN 701Legislative Council
Asked
11 October 2005
Portfolio
Local Government and Regional Development

QuestionView source ↗

(1) Having regard to section 2.30 of the Local Government Act 1995, what is the status of those suspended City of Joondalup councillors whose terms were due to expire in May 2005? (2) What provision of the Local Government Act 1995, or other act, has the effect of overriding section 2.30, thus deeming a previously lawfully elected member to be a former member? (3) Were the suspended City of Joondalup councillors whose terms expire in May 2007 invited to attend the offices of the City of Joondalup at or about 2.00 pm on Tuesday, 11 October 2005 for the purpose of receiving a copy of the recently completed report on the inquiry into the City of Joondalup? (4) Were the suspended City of Joondalup councillors whose terms were due to expire in May 2005 invited to attend the offices of the City of Joondalup on Tuesday, 11 October 2005 for the purpose of receiving the report referred to above; and, if not, what is the reason for this apparent discrimination between elected members? Hon JON FORD

AnswerView source ↗

I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1)-(2) As provided for, and envisaged by, sections 8.29(2) and (3) of the Local Government Act 1995, the terms of each councillor expired in May 2005 and each office became vacant. Section 2.30 is of no relevance. Each councillor - elected member - became a former member by effluxion of time. No deeming provision operated. (3) Yes. Section 8.23(1) of the Local Government Act 1995 requires that each councillor be given a copy of the report. (4) No. They are no longer councillors; that is, elected members. Section 8.23(1) has no application to them.
(2) What provision of the Local Government Act 1995, or other act, has the effect of overriding section 2.30, thus deeming a previously lawfully elected member to be a former member? (3) Were the suspended City of Joondalup councillors whose terms expire in May 2007 invited to attend the offices of the City of Joondalup at or about 2.00 pm on Tuesday, 11 October 2005 for the purpose of receiving a copy of the recently completed report on the inquiry into the City of Joondalup? (4) Were the suspended City of Joondalup councillors whose terms were due to expire in May 2005 invited to attend the offices of the City of Joondalup on Tuesday, 11 October 2005 for the purpose of receiving the report referred to above; and, if not, what is the reason for this apparent discrimination between elected members? Hon JON FORD replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1)-(2) As provided for, and envisaged by, sections 8.29(2) and (3) of the Local Government Act 1995, the terms of each councillor expired in May 2005 and each office became vacant. Section 2.30 is of no relevance. Each councillor - elected member - became a former member by effluxion of time. No deeming provision operated. (3) Yes. Section 8.23(1) of the Local Government Act 1995 requires that each councillor be given a copy of the report. (4) No. They are no longer councillors; that is, elected members. Section 8.23(1) has no application to them.
(3) Were the suspended City of Joondalup councillors whose terms expire in May 2007 invited to attend the offices of the City of Joondalup at or about 2.00 pm on Tuesday, 11 October 2005 for the purpose of receiving a copy of the recently completed report on the inquiry into the City of Joondalup? (4) Were the suspended City of Joondalup councillors whose terms were due to expire in May 2005 invited to attend the offices of the City of Joondalup on Tuesday, 11 October 2005 for the purpose of receiving the report referred to above; and, if not, what is the reason for this apparent discrimination between elected members? Hon JON FORD replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1)-(2) As provided for, and envisaged by, sections 8.29(2) and (3) of the Local Government Act 1995, the terms of each councillor expired in May 2005 and each office became vacant. Section 2.30 is of no relevance. Each councillor - elected member - became a former member by effluxion of time. No deeming provision operated. (3) Yes. Section 8.23(1) of the Local Government Act 1995 requires that each councillor be given a copy of the report. (4) No. They are no longer councillors; that is, elected members. Section 8.23(1) has no application to them.
(4) Were the suspended City of Joondalup councillors whose terms were due to expire in May 2005 invited to attend the offices of the City of Joondalup on Tuesday, 11 October 2005 for the purpose of receiving the report referred to above; and, if not, what is the reason for this apparent discrimination between elected members? Hon JON FORD replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1)-(2) As provided for, and envisaged by, sections 8.29(2) and (3) of the Local Government Act 1995, the terms of each councillor expired in May 2005 and each office became vacant. Section 2.30 is of no relevance. Each councillor - elected member - became a former member by effluxion of time. No deeming provision operated. (3) Yes. Section 8.23(1) of the Local Government Act 1995 requires that each councillor be given a copy of the report. (4) No. They are no longer councillors; that is, elected members. Section 8.23(1) has no application to them.
Hon JON FORD replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1)-(2) As provided for, and envisaged by, sections 8.29(2) and (3) of the Local Government Act 1995, the terms of each councillor expired in May 2005 and each office became vacant. Section 2.30 is of no relevance. Each councillor - elected member - became a former member by effluxion of time. No deeming provision operated. (3) Yes. Section 8.23(1) of the Local Government Act 1995 requires that each councillor be given a copy of the report. (4) No. They are no longer councillors; that is, elected members. Section 8.23(1) has no application to them.
I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1)-(2) As provided for, and envisaged by, sections 8.29(2) and (3) of the Local Government Act 1995, the terms of each councillor expired in May 2005 and each office became vacant. Section 2.30 is of no relevance. Each councillor - elected member - became a former member by effluxion of time. No deeming provision operated. (3) Yes. Section 8.23(1) of the Local Government Act 1995 requires that each councillor be given a copy of the report. (4) No. They are no longer councillors; that is, elected members. Section 8.23(1) has no application to them.
(1)-(2) As provided for, and envisaged by, sections 8.29(2) and (3) of the Local Government Act 1995, the terms of each councillor expired in May 2005 and each office became vacant. Section 2.30 is of no relevance. Each councillor - elected member - became a former member by effluxion of time. No deeming provision operated. (3) Yes. Section 8.23(1) of the Local Government Act 1995 requires that each councillor be given a copy of the report. (4) No. They are no longer councillors; that is, elected members. Section 8.23(1) has no application to them.
(3) Yes. Section 8.23(1) of the Local Government Act 1995 requires that each councillor be given a copy of the report. (4) No. They are no longer councillors; that is, elected members. Section 8.23(1) has no application to them.
(4) No. They are no longer councillors; that is, elected members. Section 8.23(1) has no application to them.

Explore WA Government Data

Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.

Explore more