Redland City Council has formally adopted its 2024–2025 annual report, but Mayor Jos Mitchell refused to support the document, raising concerns about transparency in ethics and integrity reporting.
Mayor Mitchell questioned why reporting from the Council’s Audit and Risk Management Committee (ARMC) on complaints and referrals to oversight bodies, including the Office of the Independent Assessor, was not included in the annual report.
“In terms of ethics and integrity reporting annually, how is that affected? How does that come about?” she asked during the Council debate.
Amanda Pafumi, General Manager Organisational Services, explained that the ARMC reports are handled internally and that only statutory requirements are included in the annual report.
“Mayor, I think you’re referring to the requirements under the Audit Risk Management Committee charter. So, they’re actually resolved through the ARMC, which is a subcommittee of Council… To my knowledge, there isn’t a requirement for an actual annual report on ethics and integrity. It’s resolved through our obligations with the ARMC charter,” she said.
Mayor Mitchell pressed on whether a report had been submitted to the ARMC.
“So, did a report in terms of ethics and integrity go back to ARMC?,” she asked.
Ms Pafumi confirmed a report had been drafted but was not yet presented.
“Mayor, there is a report currently drafted that will go to our audit committee, as you’re aware, and it’s due by the end of October,” she said.
Mayor Mitchell then asked whether any of that information would be made public.
“And does any of that information become public-facing, or how would the public become aware of that information?,” she said.
Ms Pafumi responded that the outcomes of the ARMC are included only in meeting minutes, with confidential matters kept private.
“The best way for the community to see outcomes of the ARMC is through the minutes,” she said.
“The ARMC meets four times a year, and standard matters are reported at each meeting.
“By its nature, some discussions are confidential, but a high-level summary is provided in the minutes tabled for Council resolution.”
Mayor Mitchell said the absence of ARMC reporting in the annual report raised accountability concerns.
“I’m just trying to find out if there’s anything in that report that could be contained in the annual report,” she said.
“I’m wondering about the impact of where that report is, and whether there’s documentation that could be included.”
Council officers maintained that the annual report meets all legislative obligations.
“The requirements of the annual report are statutory in nature. If you refer to the last couple of pages of the annual report, that references the Local Government Act requirements,” Ms Pafumi said.
Despite Mayor Mitchell’s opposition, council voted to adopt the 2024–2025 annual report, leaving the mayor as the sole dissenting voice.
