At what point will the citizens of Newcastle demand their local council upholds the principles of democracy and accountability rather than carrying on like a tin pot dictatorship?
For almost 12 months the Newcastle Herald has sought to get to the bottom of allegations that a series of Letters to the Editor submitted by Scott Neylon were in fact penned by council chief executive Jeremy Bath.
Only in the darkest corners of the former Soviet Union would the pursuit of these allegations not be considered to be in the public interest.
Yet from the outset, the Herald's quest for answers has been met with contempt at every turn by those earning the big bucks in the glass edifice on Stewart Avenue.
Don't they understand that sunlight is the best disinfectant?
It's not the first time City of Newcastle has come under criticism for its reluctance to be transparent.
The council featured prominently in the Herald's Walkley Award winning 2020 Your Right to Know campaign for its refusal to release consultant's reports on Stockton beach erosion. It was soon followed by another battle to uncover the real cost of moving the city's administration centre to Stewart Avenue.
A few years on and not much has changed.
In response to increasing public pressure to provide answers about last year's Pinnacle Integrity investigation into Mr Bath, the council released a version of the report in April.
Unfortunately it raised more questions than it answered.
Like many of her colleagues, journalist Donna Page has attempted to use the Government Information Public Access Act (GIPA) in an attempt to get to the truth.
Introduced in 2009, the legislation was meant to herald a new era in transparency regarding the operation of NSW government departments and agencies.
Its guiding principle was pro-disclosure unless there was an overwhelming reason why the information should be withheld.
But ask any journalist, community group or member of the public who has lodged a red hot GIPA application with a government agency and they will tell you it's like entering a parallel universe.
Basic requests for information are summarily denied or obstructed through the use of an increasingly sophisticated range of legalistic techniques to counter attempts to shake out information.
And if your request isn't denied outright, you will be threatened with bankruptcy resulting from a bill so big it would deter even the most determined public interest pest.
The situation isn't getting any better. In her most recent review of the GIPA Act, outgoing NSW Information Commissioner Elizabeth Tydd pointed to the need to further regulatory reforms to force parts of the local government sector to improve compliance with the Act.
In her attempt to find answers on behalf of the community, Ms Page lodged a GIPA application in late February that sought, among other things, a full copy of Pinnacle Integrity's final Code of Conduct Review, which found there was "no evidence that the CEO directly contributed to the letters", draft versions of the review report and the total cost of the code of the review.
Ironically, the council's director of corporate services David Clarke began his response by rattling off the pro-disclosure principles that underpin the GIPA Act. But, in a dark twist, he quickly turned his attention to Ms Page's motivation for seeking the information, in particular her recent reporting on the Neylon saga.
He asserted that her reporting had "encouraged an incorrect or false narrative in the public domain and had resulted in reputational damage to the conduct reviewer and City of Newcastle staff."
He went on to conclude that Ms Page's "conduct and motives" were justification to refuse her application under section 55 of the GIPA Act.
"It can be reasonably inferred that the applicant's motives in making this access application are to enable it to have further material with which to continue its course of conduct," he wrote.
Mr Clarke is spot on - Ms Page and Herald's motivation is always to seek answers that lead to the truth. That's what journalists do on behalf of the communities they serve.
Apparently there is further material to be uncovered relating to the Bath investigation that may cause embarrassment to certain individuals.
It is a perverse manipulation of the GIPA Act to argue that the legislation should be leveraged to hide from such revelations.
Ironically, it is worth noting that this anti-democratic stitch up is happening under the watch of a Labor Party dominated council, supposedly built on the principles of social equity and inclusion.
It is true that councillors do not determine GIPA applications, but what happened to the 2014 pledge by lord mayor Nuatali Nelmes to restore "trust and faith in civic leadership" and to "return openness and transparency to local government in Newcastle"?
In recent times the administration has been better known for producing a rate-payer funded fountain of spin, social media posts and vanity projects designed to progress the political careers of key players.
Australia's sixth largest city deserves a council and an administration that is a beacon of fair and democratic process, not a safe haven for political hacks, spin doctors and lawyers.
Local government elections return in September. Think about it Newcastle, you will get the local government you deserve.
