Code of conduct costs “will bankrupt” Councillors
November 19, 2025
By Rachel Williams
Dorset Councillors have voted to postpone a decision on a new Councillor Expenses Policy after claims a lack of reimbursement for legal fees could bankrupt some Councillors.
Councillors were clearly concerned about the legal and financial ramifications of adopting the new policy when they met at Winnaleah on Monday night.
Under the policy, Councillors would not be reimbursed for legal expenses incurred by a Councillor who has initiated a claim, is defending a claim that is personal in nature or is defending a Code of Conduct complaint.
“A Councillor is also not entitled to access Council’s relevant insurance policy for the purpose of defending a Code of Conduct complaint,” the policy states
Corporate Services Director Lauren Tolputt said council was required to have a policy to comply with the Local Government Act and it followed a new precedence in the sector regarding reimbursements.
Cr Kahlia Simmons said given the complexities of the Code of Conduct system “it would be inadvisable for a Councillor to respond to a Code of Conduct complaint without first obtaining legal options.”
“To formulate a response to a complaint would likely cost significantly more than a Councillor’s yearly allowance and would be unaffordable for most Councillors,” Cr Simmons said.
“To contemplate an appeal to an adverse response from a Code of Conduct Panel would most likely bankrupt most councillors.”
Cr Simmons asked whether Council insurance had been used in the past for Code of Conduct claims from past Councils. Ms Tolputt took the question on notice.
Former Mayor Greg Howard confirmed he had used Dorset Council insurance when he was going through the Code of Conduct process on multiple occasions.
“You would be mad to respond without legal opinion. It can cost $10,000 to $20,000 to respond to a complaint and that is more than you get for a Councillor allowance for the year ($15,657 in Dorset),” Mr Howard said.
“The excess was $5000 and I probably used $20,000 worth of excess. At one stage the legal bill that the insurance company approved the claim for when I was in debt for the case and appeals was $120,000,” he said
“Councillors are totally unprotected under this policy. I think we would be the only Council in the state to restrict it. Why would you want to be a Councillor?”
Cr Vincent Teichmann asked whether it would be better to provide Councillors with legal advice as to whether they did have a conflict of interest to avoid them making mistakes to better perform their duties.
Ms Tolputt said the Local Government Act prescribes certain expenses Council must cover in the policy, and legal advice relating to conflict of interest was not a prescribed expense.
He suggested it would be best “to help councillors avoid ending up there in the first place, if we can’t support them through a code of conduct hearing.”
Ms Tolputt said Council would need to receive legal advice on being able to include that in the policy.
“This is the decision-making forum so if Councillors chose to amend the policy they can,” she said.
General Manager John Marik advised Councillors to exclude themselves from any matter they felt they might be in a conflict with or might land them in trouble.
“If in doubt, and this is the advice of the Office of Local Government, is to step out,” Mr Marik said.
The Review to the Councillor Expenses also included reimbursements for international travel, childcare and an increase in the professional development limit
for the Deputy Mayor from $2000 to $5000 as part of the policy. Cr Jan Hughes was successful in a procedural motion to defer the item for discussion at a private workshop.