Transparency at Bundaberg council looks a lot like a black hole

The dearth of information coming out of Bundaberg council about its $75million showpiece pool raises questions as to whether the organisation might be sitting on the remains of a collapsed star.

The ongoing inability for information around expenditure on the council’s $75 million showpiece pool to escape from the council raises questions as to whether the organization might be sitting on the remains of a collapsed star.

For more than a century scientists have been scouring space to research the idea of black holes, places in the universe where gravity is so great everything is sucked in and not even light itself can escape.

Had they waited they could have simply investigated this effect much closer to home.

The Bundaberg council appears to be experiencing a similar phenomenon, with information regularly being sucked into a void never to be seen again by ratepayers.

The council’s inability to make a decision – and as a result refuse – this masthead’s Right to Information application about the new $75 million pool is the latest in a parade of transparency problems at the organisation.

It joins a lengthening list, alongside questions about the true cost of the council’s own good news site, Bundaberg Now, the swift demolition of Anzac Park, and the lack of capital work details in the budget.

These are among the transparency issues ratepayers have been making noise about lately.

More than two months was still not long enough for Bundaberg council to make any decision on a Right to Information application around expenditure on the $75 million aquatic centre.

You’d like to think the council should have this information handy given people, including one of its own councillors, have been told that’s what they need to do to get it.

It seems almost impossible for anyone to pry information from the council.

I say “almost” because, hilariously, it seems the only information which isn’t held with an iron fist is a handful of confidential documents submitted to a state inquiry under parliamentary privilege.

As was shown in May, apparently all one has to do is ask for those under the council’s Acceptable Requests Guideline Policy.

The Mayor was forced to apologise when he was found in contempt of parliament by the ethics committee after those documents were released.

One has to question why this process can obtain those confidential documents, but councillor Greg Barnes is told he needs to lodge an RTI to find out about the spending of public money.

Councillor Greg Barnes says he has been told he needs to make a Right to Information request to secure information about the council’s expenditure on the new aquatic centre, despite the existence of the council’s own Acceptable Requests Guidelines Policy.

The fun doesn’t stop there, either.

In the wake of concerns about cost blowouts, unplanned works and delays at the $75 million aquatic centre – claims rejected by the council – the organisation told ratepayers it was “on time and on budget” and that they should rely solely on the council’s Our Bundaberg Region website as “a single source of truth”.

As claims go it does have a certain “Ministry” smell about it.

Oh well (or should that be Orwell?), you know what they say: If a government body says it, it must be true … right?

Originally published as Transparency at Bundaberg council looks a lot like a black hole