A MOTION seeking to change council meeting governance rules to increase “scrutiny, transparency and accountability” was voted down by councillors at their 14 October meeting.
The motion was moved by Cr David Gill and sought to amend the current governance rules to enable the right to ask questions of council officers, ensure the chair has a stated and recorded reason to reject a councillor’s question, ensure a councillor has a right to move a dissent motion against the chair, amend the procedure motions section to require a two-thirds majority to pass a procedural “put” motion, and to remove any potential subjectivity and provide clear, objective definitions for the kind of motions the chair can reject.
Gill’s motion comes after several incidents he views as “limiting democratic debate”. In recent meetings there have been two “put” motions, where a councillor requests the chair put a motion to a vote that there be no further discussion on a matter, and for the matter to go directly to a vote of determination.
One of those was concerning a motion from Cr Bruce Ranken asking the shire to lobby for term limit for councillors, allowing no councillor to serve more than three terms (12 years) in their lifetime (Shire to lobby for the introduction of term limits for councillors, The News 7/10/25).
After Ranken had spoken on his motion, Cr Paul Pingiaro moved a “put” motion enabling there to be a vote on the issue without any further debate. The put motion was passed six votes to four. The motion was then put to a vote and passed six votes to three. The effect of the “put” motion was that no debate was allowed on the contentious motion that would disqualify Gill, who has served on the Shire of Mornington and Mornington Peninsula Shire for a total of 20 years, from seeking another term.
Gill sought to address the perceived “shutting down of debate” by using procedural “put” motions in his notice of motion on 14 October seeking to change the rules to require a two-thirds majority for them to pass.
“A put motion is where theoretically, according to the rules, a chairperson can allow a motion where they feel there’s been fair debate,” said Gill.
“It’s been enough debate to be able to establish that there’s been a fair debate and that the motion be put before everyone that has debated.
“So that’s how the rule has been used and should be used. So having a two-thirds majority might just ensure that we defend the right to a fair debate in this chamber.”
Ranken spoke against the motion saying “Democracy isn’t about changing the rules because you don’t like the outcome. That’s one councillor, one vote”.
“The supermajority gimmicks and bespoke carve outs tilt the field towards a minority and sideline the elected majority.”
Pingiaro also spoke against the motion saying, “This shouldn’t be a quiet tilt where some votes become more equal than others”.
Both Ranken and Pingiaro argued against changes on the grounds that the state government is currently working on model local governance rules that could override Gill’s proposed motion.
Cr Max Patton spoke in favour of the motion saying “The items that are listed in this notice of motion are in direct response to events that have taken place during this council term”.
“In my view, I think there are issues with the governance rules, and I don’t think it can wait for the model governance rules to be released.”
In closing, Gill told councillors “I think that the model rules will be much more like what I’m talking about than people might suspect”.
“The meetings here are basically run well and smoothly and it has been a good example here tonight. But there are times when we need to have rules that are less opaque and clearer,” said Gill.
Gill’s motion was defeated by a vote five votes to four with Crs Allen, Williams, Batty, Ranken and Pingiaro against, and Crs Patton, Stephens, Binyon and Gill in favour. Crs Roper and Marsh were not in attendance at the meeting.
First published in the Mornington News – 21 October 2025
