Councillors trade barbs as split develops over major waste procurement process

The meeting was called specifically to deal with the waste tender process known as the ‘Resource Recovery Collective Hume Tender Award’.

Cr Sali used his casting vote firstly to reject an original recommendation that would have awarded the contracts to Cleanaway and Western Organics, and then a second time to support a new motion requesting that council chief executive Peter Harriott investigate a new procurement process.

Speaking after the votes, Cr Sali said councillors were aware that in the case of a deadlock he would use his decisive power to vote with his conscience.

“It remains consistent and I would expect anyone in a position that has a casting vote to remain consistent on their view,” he said.

During the meeting, Cr Anthony Brophy, who put the motion abandoning the collective tender award in favour of a new process, accused councillors who had backed the original recommendation of disrespecting his colleagues who had supported his move.

“Some of the commentary here today has been disrespectful to those supporting the councillors in this particular motion that’s being put forward and undervaluing, perhaps, the integrity and consternation about what all councillors have been through in terms of coming to this process or decision,” he said.

Cr Seema Abdullah, who had supported Cleanaway and Western Composting being awarded the waste contracts, was left exasperated by the new proposal.

“I want to express my utter disappointment. I’m appalled,” she said.

“I feel what I have always dreaded, that if this council starts making decisions with a very cowboy approach where does it lead us in terms of council’s trust, the community’s trust and council’s ability to make difficult decisions?” she said.

Cr Sam Spinks, who backed the original motion, said it was “absolutely a mistake” to abandon the process.

“It is entirely wrong to abandon the tender process and most importantly, I am not hearing any justification for this abandonment that leads to anything other than the curation of a preference and I think that is deeply poor governance and deeply in contrast to the good faith of any tender process,” she said.

Speaking in favour of the original recommendation, Cr Geoff Dobson said all companies entering the tender process knew what criteria they had to meet.

“Let us be quite clear, each contractor, who tendered for our waste management requirements, was made well aware of each of the criteria, the weightings, experience in the field, and after much deliberation a recommendation from the panel was made to our council via our council officers,” he said.

“It is a collaborative process, which provided the best contractor for each independent council according to the group who evaluated it.”

However, Cr Greg James, although admitting he had limited expertise in the field, said he was not satisfied enough weight had been given to the importance of supporting local businesses.

“I have no qualifications or expertise to question their (the procurement panel) decision and I won’t do that, but quite simply, I fully support the need for this council to incentivise our local economy and more importantly our many businesses within our region,” he said.

Cr Dinny Adem seized on Cr James’s admission of a lack of expertise in the field of waste tenders to accuse councillors who wanted to pursue another process of hypocrisy.

“One councillor said that he hasn’t got the expertise to challenge or question the assessment capacity of some of these panel members and he was right in saying that as well, but in fact, that is what we’re doing,” he said.

Cr Ben Ladson did not speak to either of the motions, but voted against the original recommendation and in favour of a new process.

Cr Fern Summer was an apology and not present at the meeting.