How Bass Coast has been dogged by secrecy

IF YOU were to count the number of times the Bass Coast Shire Council has featured in this column over the past four years, the local shire would easily be the clubhouse leader.

And there’s one reoccurring theme of these fiascos – lack of transparency.

Who could forget the misplaced bid to do away with community question time at council meetings?

The failure to release the full ‘Bass Coast Shire Coastal Risk Assessment’ report about our hazardous surf beaches until after a catastrophic spate of drownings along the coast last summer.

Or the failure to keep affected property owners in Wonthaggi informed about the Victorian Planning Authority’s insistence that wholesale Environmental Audit Overlays be introduced on more than 600 homes and private building blocks in the town.

There was also the outrageous indulgence of allegedly spending an extra $2 million on a failed ego trip to get Passivhaus accreditation for the already ridiculously expensive Berninneit cultural centre.

Putting pressure on people to vote ‘yes’ at the referendum, the setting up of an external Environment Fund when local Landcare groups could do with more support, the messy transition to a new mayor, the political hijacking of citizenship ceremonies, unwillingness to consult directly with residents over the failed $35 million Surf Beach-Sunderland Bay scheme, the mystery of the mayoral chains, the focus on ideology including in the council’s key Vision document, at the expense of traditional projects and services…

The list, regrettably, is almost endless.

But sadly, it’s not over with yet.

At last week’s council meeting, one of the very few where there has been genuine discussion and debate during the present regime, we received an insight into what really goes on when the council’s administration is developing a new policy and needing to go out for community consultation.

Despite revealing in its fourth Quarter Report and now adopted annual report last Wednesday that council had already 100 per cent completed developing its Dog Park Strategy, it has been reported by the Phillip Island Bass Coast Dog Owners Association that a high-ranking official of the shire told them just two weeks earlier that nothing had happened, and they would be the first to know.

In fact, in order to get into the 2023-24 Annual Report as 100 per cent complete, a document that now goes to the Victorian Auditor General for high-level approval, the Dog Park Strategy would have had to be completed by June 30, 2024 – three and a half months ago.

But who knew? And why not? Not the bulk of the councillors, we’re told, and not the dog owners’ association who had already demonstrated a willingness to make dogs on beaches and dog parks a political issue during the Bass Coast Shire election campaign.

So, what’s in that “completed” strategy that the shire doesn’t want the Island’s dog owners and other dog owners around the shire to know? Are they going to cut back on the opportunities for dogs to run, swim and exercise on local beaches? Are they going to take the need for more dog parks across the shire seriously? What?

The thing about not being open and transparent is that it almost always comes back to bite you on the butt. As much as being amoral, it’s just not the percentage play in the long run.

Even if nothing else changes, the Bass Coast Shire Council’s administration needs to rule a line off when the next council is installed next month, make a commitment to keeping people better informed and trust that the collective knowledge of the councillors and the community will lead to a better outcome all round.

If they do that, and the new councillors insist on it, we’ll look for other targets for our weekly rant.