Thursday, 4 December 2025

 Anasina GRAY-BARBERIO (Northern Metropolitan) (23:37): (2219) My adjournment matter this evening is for the Minister for Local Government, and the action I seek is a review examining whether the model councillor code of conduct and its enforcement by arbiters stifles legitimate political debate in Victorian councils. Merri-bek city councillor Adam Pulford has just been suspended for two weeks for describing the behaviour of a fellow councillor, Cr Yildiz, as ‘duplicitousness’ because he voted against something he had previously claimed to support. At issue is a pledge supporting rainbow crossings signed by Cr Yildiz in 2024 and Cr Yildiz’s subsequent vote against rainbow crossings in 2025. The use of the term ‘duplicitousness’ to describe another councillor supporting an initiative before an election and opposing it six months later was considered disrespectful by the appointed arbiter and therefore in breach of the code.

A member interjected.

Anasina GRAY-BARBERIO: Exactly. Further, the arbiter found that Cr Pulford should have addressed Cr Yildiz’s stated concern, which was the cost of the rainbow crossing. Cr Yildiz has previously criticised other queer-friendly events, such as drag story time, and accused Cr Pulford of having a conflict of interest on a rainbow flag motion because Cr Pulford is gay. In his speech, Cr Pulford said:

This pattern of behaviour indicates it’s not about cost, it’s about something else.

That something else is homophobia. When a gay man complains about homophobia and gets suspended, that should be a red flag for the minister that something is wrong with the enforcement of the model councillor code of conduct. Once an arbiter has made their decision on a complaint, the only avenue a councillor has for appeal is judicial review in the Supreme Court, an expensive and burdensome process that effectively excludes the majority of councillors.

The model councillor code of conduct says that nothing in it is intended to limit, restrict or detract from robust public debate of issues. It is not part of robust debate to point out when a councillor has promised one thing before being elected and doing the opposite once elected. Voters expect their representatives to be allowed to speak without being muzzled. We would not entertain this level of interference in a Parliament. Of course MPs and councillors should maintain some standard of decorum, but not at the expense of open political communication. Minister, I encourage you to look at the way the code is being enforced and consider how to make it fit for modern democracy.