
Pick the conflict of interest Survey
By John Mitchell
A councillor’s challenge to a member of the public gallery that he name the
councillors he alleged had a conflict of interest, and the gallery member’s
acceptance of that challenge, has again highlighted the difference between some
councillors and members of the public in their understanding of what constitutes
a conflict of interest.
The Local Government Act describes possible conflicts as being ‘pecuniary’ and
‘non pecuniary’. A ‘pecuniary’ interest involves a relationship with a matter
before the council which would give the councillor a financial benefit. A ‘non-pecuniary’interest
is membership or association with an individual or group doing business with the
council which raises the possibility of a ‘favour’ or a ‘disfavour’ being done.
While successive Palerang mayors, and before that Yarrowlumla and Tallaganda
mayors, have insisted that the declaration of an interest is up to the
individual councillors, changes to the Local Government Act now oblige the
General Manager and other councillors to advise the council if they are aware of
circumstances which would create a conflict.
If a councillor has a conflict of interest he or she must declare the interest
and leave the council chamber while the matter is being considered. If the
councillor is aware of the conflict, he or she may ask for advice from the top
table.
The test of a conflict of interest is how a ‘reasonable’ person would judge the
relationship between a councillor and a matter before the council. Accordingly,
the Mirror has decided to ask you our readers, the most reasonable of people,
how you would judge a series of scenarios which may or may not involve a
conflict of interest.
If you'd prefer to print it out, and Mail or Fax it to us, use this
PDF version.