‘Drastic action’: Call for heads to roll over Sea Swift court battle
Allegations of mismanagement have been levelled against local government in bombshell fallout arising from a $66m court case brought by a Far North council against shipping firm Sea Swift.
Cairns
Don't miss out on the headlines from Cairns. Followed categories will be added to My News.
Allegations of mismanagement have been levelled against a Far North council in a bombshell fallout arising from a $66m court case it brought against shipping firm Sea Swift that could put future delivery of essential goods in jeopardy.
Sea Swift is at loggerheads with Torres Strait Island Regional Council over a multimillion dollar bill for use of council-maintained marine infrastructure in the Torres Strait.
On December 21, 2022, council lawyers issued Sea Swift with 253 invoices totalling $66,543,146.
The case is yet to be resolved.
Leichhardt MP Warren Entsch said if ordered to pay the invoices in full there would be devastating impacts for the people of the Torres Strait.
“Sea Swift needs to have access to these communities at no cost,” Mr Entsch said.
With a low ratepayer base, TSIRC relies on state government grants to maintain moorings, boat ramps and jetties.
Mr Entsch criticised the council, claiming they charged exorbitant fees, upward of $2m per year, for use of poorly maintained marine infrastructure, key to the delivery of essential goods such as food and fuel.
“The council is gouging and providing no service whatsoever,” Mr Entsch said.
The federal member queried whether council’s conduct as an elected body adhered to the requirements outlined by the Local Government Act.
In March this year the state government announced an $80m joint commitment with the federal government to overhaul marine infrastructure across the Torres Strait.
Council is pursuing Sea Swift for $66m in the Supreme Court for alleged unpaid docking fees while operating in the Strait between 2014 and 2018.
Sea Swift chief executive officer Dwayne Freeman said discussions with council aimed at resolving the matter were “ongoing”.
“This case is currently before the courts, and therefore Sea Swift is unable to comment further at this stage,” he said.
According to Mr Entsch, Sea Swift has offered “a fair and reasonable settlement” however the company has been unable to secure a meeting with the council to discuss historical under-declaration of use of marine infrastructure.
It’s claimed all negotiations in regard to the dispute have been handled by international law firm acting for council, Clyde & Co.
“If Sea Swift was forced to pay, it would send the company into voluntary administration immediately,” Mr Entsch said.
Council CEO James William, in response to the federal member’s allegations, said the council was meeting with their external legal team shortly.
“We take the issue very seriously and that we will consider all our options about the so-called allegations raised in the public domain,” he said.
According to court documents council chief executive Mr William instructed Clyde & Co that he “considered that there was a basis for concluding there had been non-compliant reporting by Sea Swift of its uses of the (council’s) facilities.”
Sea Swift has been an asset managed by state government entity Queensland Investment Corporation since 2019 and council is largely funded through state grants.
“In effect we’ve got a state government controlled entity in TSIRC pursuing a Queensland Government managed entity,” Mr Entsch said.
“It’s utter bureaucratic madness.”
Mr Entsch has called for the standing aside of Torres Strait Island Regional Council Mayor Phillemon Mosby and chief executive Mr William pending a full inquiry into council’s conduct and management.
“This calls for drastic action and I’m asking that they be removed from their positions until this matter is resolved,” Mr Entsch said.
Torres Strait Island Regional Council Mayor Phillemon Mosby, responding to Mr Entsch’s allegations, said he was limited in what could be said due to the case remaining before the courts.
“Whatever people’s opinions, we are here to represent our communities and that is what we will do,” he said.
The wrangle over use of council-owned moorings and jetties is based on Sea Swift’s use of facilities between July 2014 and June 2018.
Court documents filed by council allege “inaccurate completion of self-reporting forms” leading to 253 invoices being in dispute.
And council’s legal team have not ruled out further claims based on possible further examples of “inaccurate” self-reporting.
“Our client reserves the right to levy additional Default Maritime Fees if the production of further documentation by Sea Swift should evidence any further inaccurate/non-compliant self-reporting,” Clyde & Co stated in a submission to the court.
In January 2023, Sea Swift commenced a proceeding in the Supreme Court seeking a judicial review of the council’s decision to impose the default maritime fees.
More Coverage
Originally published as ‘Drastic action’: Call for heads to roll over Sea Swift court battle
Police station sale sparks discussion over Gordonvale’s future
Claims a historic building was sold from under the noses of a Far North community group have been rebuffed by Labor, with calls to rejuvenate a beloved town square emerging as a key election issue.
‘Ridiculous thing’: LNP candidate dodges abortion, VAD questions
Far North voters are more concerned with crime, cost of living and housing than changes to abortion and voluntary assisted dying laws, the LNP’s candidate for Barron River Bree James says.