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
2003-05-28
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.
English
Tabled papers
application/pdf
Copyright
See publication
https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/C2019C00042
https://hdl.handle.net/10070/307028
https://hdl.handle.net/10070/346044
REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 264(5) OF THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT ACT REGARDING THE DISMISSAL OF THE YUGUL MANGI COMMUNITY GOVERNMENT COUNCIL Page 2 Commissioner Teague found that the Council had: failed to ensure the separation of the affairs of the council from the affairs of the Yugul Mangi Clan Development Pty Ltd; expended money for a purpose not authorised by or under the Act or another Act; expended money not allocated in the council's adopted estimates; failed to fulfil its obligations under the Local Government (Accounting) Regulations in respect of r.3, r.4, r.7, r.9, r.10, r.12, r.13, r.14, r.18A, r.21, r.22, and r.23 of these Regulations; and that Members of the council failed to declare under section 20 of the Act an interest in Yugul Mangi Clan Development Pty Ltd. He was also of the view that the Yugul Mangi Community Government scheme should be reviewed, particularly its membership provisions. In addition to the findings and recommendations set out in his report, Commissioner Teague also reached various other conclusions, and recommended further investigation of various actions brought to his attention during the Inquiry. Various officers and agencies are currently undertaking these further investigations. Due to legal advice, and a desire to take no steps which would prejudice these ongoing investigations or any further action which may result, I have decided to not publish details of those actions. In making my recommendation to the Administrator to dismiss the Council, I considered the findings of Commissioner Teague and formed the opinion that they supported my reasons for recommending the suspension of members in the first place. I was also of the opinion that the issues were serious and warranted continued intervention. Under the Local Government Act my options were limited. I could only recommend that the members be reinstated or the Council be dismissed. I chose the latter.