Mayor Tom Tate’s request for legal costs rejected by councillors
Councillors have rejected a request by Mayor Tom Tate to be compensated for legal costs for a personal defamation case.
Gold Coast councillors have rejected a request by Mayor Tom Tate to be compensated for $100 in legal costs for a personal defamation case.
Councillors went into a closed session on Tuesday for what has been described as an intense one hour debate at the Evandale Chambers before emerging just after 2pm to vote.
Only councillor Glenn Tozer voted against the motion to reject Mr Tate’s request, which was put to councillors in open session.
Deputy Mayor Mark Hammel, who chaired the session, in a brief address said it was important to understand the debate, for some councillors, had brought up “some uncomfortable times” from the past.
“It has definitely brought out some interesting points of view and debate from councillors who were part of the term when this occurred,” he said.
He added the recommendation did “not fit comfortably with everybody” but looked to the future in terms of policy.
Mr Tozer, outside the meeting, said he voted against the recommendation because he had concerns with the legal submission by Mr Tate’s lawyers.
“I could not support the resolution because of some of the elements of the legal submissions, even though I was supportive of the decision not to reimburse,” he said.
The resolution put forward by Mr Hammel, said:
• That council had received and considered a claim for reimbursement of legal expenses incurred by the Mayor in instituting proceedings in December 2017.
• Council acknowledges and accepts the Mayor’s submission that the legal action undertaken was motivated by a desire to protect the reputation and good standing of the City.
• That where a councillor determined to start legal proceedings, the costs are not indemnified under council’s insurance policies — such actions being self-funded unless the councillor gains prior support.
The reimbursement related to a defamation action Mr Tate launched against councillor Peter Young and the ABC in late 2017 following the ABC program All That Glitters.
Mr Tate dropped his case against Mr Young in November 2019 and withdrew against the ABC in August 2021.
Both Mr Tate and Mr Young, due to conflicts of interests, left the chamber.
Outside the chamber, Mr Tate said the matter was not about money with the funds, if he was successful, to be given to charities.
The Bulletin last Thursday revealed the Mayor was seeking compensation of more than $400,000 — and that he would give that money back to charity.
Councillors were then told in an email last Friday Mr Tate would only seek a $100 reimbursement.
Mr Tate was asked about his intent in seeking compensation.
“It’s about the process. To make it clear when there’s a reputational attack on councillors, officers, the City itself — who is the person to actually shield the city,” he said.
“The reputational damage was done. I went through it. This is about next time there is unwarranted smearing on our city, there has got to be a mechanism for someone, if it is the Mayor, to go out there and actually present the case.
“If you need to go straight to court do so. We can learn our lesson. Not every mayor is going to be blessed with the resources I have.”
