Report Circumstances giving rise to the dismissal of the Yugul Mangi Community Government Council Report by the Minister for Local Government pursuant to section 264(5) of the Local Government Act
Tabled Paper 914
Tabled Papers for 9th Assembly 2001 - 2005; Tabled Papers; ParliamentNT
Tabled by Jack Ah Kit
Made available by the Legislative Assembly of the Northern Territory under Standing Order 240. Where copyright subsists with a third party it remains with the original owner and permission may be required to reuse the material.
REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 264(5) OF THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT ACT REGARDING THE DISMISSAL OF THE YUGUL MANGI COMMUNITY GOVERNMENT COUNCIL On 19 August 2002, the Administrator acting on my advice suspended all council members of the Yugul Mangi Community Government Council and I appointed Mr Roger Melvin Teague as Commissioner to conduct an inquiry into and investigate the affairs of Council in relation to alleged failures of the Council and to report, in writing, to me. The reasons for Mr Teague's appointment were that Council: (a) failed to ensure the separation of the affairs of the Yugul Mangi Community Government Council from the Yugul Mangi Clan Development Pty Ltd; (b) made expenditure for a purpose not authorised by or under the Local Government Act or other Acts; (c) made expenditure not allocated in its adopted estimates; (d) failed to comply with directions issued by Inspectors of Local Government within required timeframes; (e) failed to reasonably assist Inspectors of Local Government; (f) failed to ensure that certain members declared an interest in Yugul Mangi Clan Development pursuant to section 20 of the Act; and (g) failed to fulfil its obligations under the Local Government (Accounting) Regulations. Following the suspension, I notified the Council of the reasons for its suspension and also advised that I had appointed Mr Teague as Commissioner to look into the affairs of the Council and my reasons for making such an appointment. Commissioner Teague has completed his inquiry and provided me with a written report of his findings. As a result, I recommended to the Administrator that the Council be dismissed. In his report to me, Commissioner Teague advised that he had sought submissions from members and persons affected by the inquiry and required all claims to be supported with evidence. His process included the examination, under oath or affirmation, of voluntary witnesses as well as witnesses who were summoned to appear before him in public proceedings held in Ngukurr, Katherine and Darwin.