It is therefore rather disappointing to see the matters before us with City of Ballarat.

So, what is good governance and why is it important?

The good governance guide produced by Municipal Association of Victoria, Victorian Local Governance Association, Local Government Victoria, and Local Government Professionals states that good governance "gives the local community confidence in its council" and "leads to better decisions".

The guide also states that "people are more likely to have confidence in their local government if decisions are made in a transparent and accountable way."

HAVE YOUR SAY AT THE BOTTOM OF THIS STORY

The previous sentence is worth a second read.

Can Council state that things appear to be transparent and accountable?

If not, then there is improvement needed. Referring some matters to an audit and risk committee is an excellent way to investigate the transparency and accountability of projects.

However, integrity is outside of that committee's charter.

Council must also look at its Councillor Code of Conduct Policy.

Every Councillor receives the policy and signs a document to state that they have a copy and will abide by it.

The Policy is required under the Local Government Act. So, City of Ballarat has the required Policy.

But how is it monitored? Who reviews it? Who ensures the compliance?

The policy owner is listed as the CEO. This in itself strikes me as slightly odd given that the CEO is employed by Council.

That aside, there have been matters that appear to be potential breaches that seem to have been overlooked.

A Councillor Conduct Panel can be formed to hear matters and determine whether an offence under the Act has occurred.

Misconduct is defined in the Local Government Act 2020 as "any breach by a Councillor of the prescribed standards of conduct included in the Councillor Code of Conduct."

The Act lists numerous matters that are considered serious misconduct, and included is "bullying by a Councillor of another Councillor or a member of Council staff."

My concern is, that if matters are potentially misconduct at either a serious level or other category, why is Council not following its own governance responsibilities?

Going back to the definition in the Guide, "people are more likely to have confidence in their local government if decisions are made in a transparent and accountable way."

So, isn't it appropriate for Council to be demonstrating to the community that potential breaches will be investigated?

Whilst there is a time limit on investigating cases in the present Act, we can see at present several potential breaches.

These are current. By way of example, the Meeting Procedure Local Law 2018 is included in the Councillor Code of Conduct Policy.

In other words, if a Councillor doesn't abide by the meeting procedures, they have breached the Code of Conduct Policy.

As an example, audio equipment must not be used at any Council meeting without first obtaining the permission of Council.

Speaking times: A Councillor must not speak longer than the time allocated unless they are granted an extension.

Some matters specifically outlined in the Councillor Code of Conduct includes "observe principles of good governance and act with integrity".

It also mentions "avoiding statements (whether oral or in writing) or actions that will or are likely to mislead or deceive."

This is an interesting one, in terms of what may fall into this.

For example, if hypothetically a Councillor pays someone to write a speech for them, or write an opinion piece for them (not in an official capacity by the organisation but as an individual), is this misleading and deceptive?

Does it seduce the listener/reader into believing that person has skills they do not?

There is no copyright issue if the true author has consented to the false attribution of his or her work.

But, if such a matter was to occur (and it may or may not have); is the behaviour deceptive or misleading?

In academe such a matter would be regarded as a breach of academic integrity.

There are several other components worth reading, and interested readers may care to do so.

And what I do hope, is that Councillors go back to the Policy and remind themselves of what they signed they would abide by.

And any potential breaches should be investigated.

If they are not, what message does this send to the residents and ratepayers (going back to that definition of good governance again)?

If Ballarat wants to maximise its potential success in lobbying for Government funding, it may want to work on its governance brand; because it seems like it presently has little value right now.

Dr Elisa Zentveld is a Federation University academic